Cyprus-Forum.com

[Othellos]

Ah...still in "selective memory" mode.

O.

Still challenging GC attempts to re-write history of the period of 63-74 if that is what you mean.

Even if this is what you are trying to do, your memory still operates selectively. Consequently, your entire "approach" prohibits you from challenging anything. Simply put, you are shooting yourself on the foot again and again.

O.

[erolz]

Even if this is what you are trying to do, your memory still operates selectively. Consequently, your entire "approach" prohibits you from challenging anything. Simply put, you are shooting yourself on the foot again and again.

O.

There is nothing selective (imo) in my assertion that the primary reason for TC fleeing their homes from 63 onwards was organised and planned GC violence against TC and the fear that engendered in the TC community. It is simply a statement of reality that is backed up by indepdnednt reaserch, indpendent journalist here at that time, and common sense as well. You have said that there were other factors and I have never disputed that. You also say, as I understand it, that organised and planned GC violence against TC community by GC was not the major factor in the fleeing of so many TC from their homes. This I refute absolutely. I beleive my assertion. I also believe it is backed up by the views of indepndent experts that have studied the issue in detail (like the one refered to on the cyprus-conflict site), is consistent with the many many press reports from indepndent countries of this time and is consistent with common sense (using violence and fear of viloence is an effective means of forcing people from their homes, ordering them to do so in the persuit of some political objective is not). If expressing these opinions as clearly and plainly as I know how is shooting myself in the foot then so be it. I personaly am of the view that the more GC insist on trying to deny the truth of what happened in the period 63-74 and why (like you and main source are doing on this aspect) the more they weaken their case about injustices done to their community in the eyes of world opinion and the more concernsand fears they raise (or reinforce) in the minds of TC about the chances of a fair agreed settlement.

[MicAtCyp]

Erol,

I point out the reality that EOKA B was a break away subset of EOKA.
Eoka ended in 1960.Other orginnisations followed like National Front each one with different goals and objectives.Eoka B was created in 1971.It was NOT a subset of Eoka

Was there anyone in EOKA B who was not in EOKA?
Yes many. The vast majority of Eoka members did not become members of Eoka B though. It was a significantly smaller organisation.

Was the leader of EOKA not the same person as the leader of EOKA B.
It was the same yes. Where the branch leaders the same though? No they weren’t

Was the declared aim of EOKA B not the same as EOKA.
No it wasn’t. For Eoka it was liberation AND annexation with Greece for Eoka B it was kill Makarios/overthrow the Government to annex with Greece.Eoka got wide support for it's first target, Eoka B did not get any support for it's first target.When Eoka B was formed the Enosis dream was already 4 years dead -ever since 1967

This is the reality of EOKA B.
Not exactly!

PS.The attacks of Grivas at specific TC strategic positions e.g. kofinou (=crossing of the one and only road connecting Nicosia with Limassol and Larnaca) were not done while he was leader of any organisation but as leader of the army!

[Othellos]

There is nothing selective (imo) in my assertion that the primary reason for TC fleeing their homes from 63 onwards was organised and planned GC violence against TC and the fear that engendered in the TC community.

The truth is that until 1960 the TMT were used in exerting violence against totally defenseless GCs with Britain's tolerance and even encouragement. When in 1963 there was GC resistance it caught them by surprise, even if this was a lot less organized and a lot less planned than a series of Turkish actions which took place around that time or before: formation and fortification of enclaves, arms and troops imports, attacks against isolated GC communities, forced eviction of GCs from carefully selected areas, murders of progressive TCs, forced relocation or virtual imprisonment of TCs into the enclaves etc.

It is simply a statement of reality that is backed up by indepdnednt reaserch, indpendent journalist here at that time, and common sense as well.

Independent journalists? Like Harry Scott Gibbons, perhaps?

You have said that there were other factors and I have never disputed that.

You disputed them by playing down their significance systematically in order to reduce their contribution into the problem.

You also say, as I understand it, that organised and planned GC violence against TC community by GC was not the major factor in the fleeing of so many TC from their homes. This I refute absolutely. I beleive my assertion. I also believe it is backed up by the views of indepndent experts that have studied the issue in detail (like the one refered to on the cyprus-conflict site), is consistent with the many many press reports from indepndent countries of this time and is consistent with common sense (using violence and fear of viloence is an effective means of forcing people from their homes, ordering them to do so in the persuit of some political objective is not).

It seems that your entire "independent experts" argument here is constructed around the content of one web site parts of which you insist on treating as nothing less than the "Holy Bible" of the Cyprus history and problem. While you have every right to do this, your approach remains superficially selective and thus insufficient. Yet you insist upon it as the "ultimate reality" despite the fact that on several occasions you were presented with numbers, dates, facts and specific sources which you couldn't dispute and which indicated that there is a lot more than just your "reality".

If expressing these opinions as clearly and plainly as I know how is shooting myself in the foot then so be it. I personaly am of the view that the more GC insist on trying to deny the truth of what happened in the period 63-74 and why (like you and main source are doing on this aspect) the more they weaken their case about injustices done to their community in the eyes of world opinion and the more concernsand fears they raise (or reinforce) in the minds of TC about the chances of a fair agreed settlement.

What you are saying is this: accept my "truth" otherwise there can never be a fair agreed settlement (whatever that means). In practice however your entire thesis is built on distorting or minimizing selectively historic facts with the sole aim to blame overwhelmingly one side (Greek Cypriots) over the other and thus justify Turkey's murder, looting and ethnic cleansing in 1974 as well as their ongoing occupation in the north part of Cyprus.

O.

[erolz]

Firstly I wish to appologise in advance for the lenght of this post and even more so for the content of it. It is not my intention or desrie to provoke animosity or dredge up the past just for the sake of creating animosity. I do however feel compelled to denfend my statements and the ridiculous assertions that they are based on a 'single source'. So appologies for this post.

The truth is that until 1960 the TMT were used in exerting violence against totally defenseless GCs with Britain's tolerance and even encouragement.

These would be the totaly defensless GC that were murdering GC moderates, British servicemens wives, TC and many others in their 'heroic struggle'?

When in 1963 there was GC resistance it caught them by surprise, even if this was a lot less organized and a lot less planned than a series of Turkish actions which took place around that time or before:

[snip]

Independent journalists? Like Harry Scott Gibbons, perhaps?

[snip]

It seems that your entire "independent experts" argument here is constructed around the content of one web site parts of which you insist on treating as nothing less than the "Holy Bible" of the Cyprus history and problem.

[snip]

While you have every right to do this, your approach remains superficially selective and thus insufficient.

A few months before [june 63], the Archbishop has begun to express his conviction that the Zurich Constitution was unworkable. But even the best constitutions are unworkable if those who are called upon to ensure their operation do not want to make them work. And the Archbishop did not wish to put into operation the relevant constitutional provisions which envisaged the establishment of separate Greek and Turkish municipalities, a separation which Makarios himself had insisted on. Influenced perhaps by those around him, he refused to put into operation the relevant provisions, and the Turks, utterly distrustful and suspicious, in order to compel the Archbishop to yield, took reprisals by obstructing the voting of taxation laws by the Parliament. According to the Constitution separate majorities of Greeks and Turks were required for the imposition of taxes, customs dues and tariffs. It was natural that an impasse should be created as a result of the Archbishop’s backsliding

All in all, these proposals (sc. the Thirteen Points) represented the culmination of persistent Greek Cypriot attempts to amend the ‘negative’ parts of the 1960 constitution in accordance with the first stage of the Akritas Plan.

All this happened because Makarios wanted to remove all constitutional rights from the Turkish Cypriots. From the moment Makarios started openly to deprive the Turkish Cypriots of their rights, the present events were inevitable.

Nicosia, 1 March 1964

Our aim, Mr Premier, is the abolition of the Zurich and London Agreements, so that it may be possible for the Greek Cypriot people, in agreement with the Motherland, to determine in an unfettered way its future. I am a signatory of these Agreements on behalf of the Greeks of Cyprus. In my personal opinion, in the conditions then prevailing, ‘naught else was to be done’. But not for a moment did I believe that the agreements would constitute a permanent settlement. It was a settlement of harsh necessity and, in my view, was the solution of the Cyprus drama which was the lesser evil at that time. Since then internationally and locally the conditions have changed and I think that the time has come for us to undertake to rid ourselves of the Agreements imposed on us

The Greek forces from Greece have come to Cyprus in order to impose the will of the Greeks of Cyprus on the Turks. We want ENOSIS, but the Turks are against it. We shall impose our will on the Turks. We are strong and we shall do so.

Until this small Turkish community, forming a part of the Turkish race which has been the terrible enemy of Hellenism is expelled, the duty of the heroes of EOKA can never be considered as terminated.

there exist well-founded proofs leading to the conclusion that, from 1962 onwards, the Archbishop had begun to toy with the idea of a new act of power, that is to say, a new offensive. In January 1963, without the knowledge of the Greek Government, planning exercises were carried out for three days at the Presidential Palace in Nicosia, with the objective of neutralising the Turks. The Archbishop’s staff officers envisaged the participation also of the Greek Force in Cyprus in the operations, that is to say, they were discounting conflict between Greek and Turkish forces;

When the Turks objected to the amendment of the Constitution, Archbishop Makarios put his plan into effect and the Greek attack began in December 1963.

As early as 1962, Polycarpos Yeorgadjis, the Minister of the Interior, had warned the officers of his underground army that in the following year, President Makarios would propose amendments to the constitution which would be so unacceptable to the Turkish Cypriots that TMT would start fighting. When the amendments were proposed, there was general dismay among many of the leaders of this Greek Cypriot force that Turkish Cypriots did not rise to this bait. As a result, elements of the Greek Cypriot police and a number of armed Greek Cypriot irregulars were attempting to goad TMT into action in December 1963. Had the incident of 21 December not occurred there can be no doubt that a similar incident would have been precipitated by Christmas.

The Archbishop, persistent in his brinkmanship, had not thought out anything. He had been surrounded in Cyprus by Greek officers, despatched by the Greek Government to organise units of the Cyprus Army, who, being influenced by extremist elements, had cultivated in the Cypriots the spirit that Enosis, after the ending of the British rule, was an easy enterprise which needed not much determination and daring.

We went together into the sealed-off Turkish quarter of Nicosia in which 200 to 300 people had been slaughtered in the last five days. We were the first Western reporters there and we have seen sights too frightful to be described in print - horrors so extreme that the people seemed stunned beyond tears and reduced to an hysterical and mirthless giggle that is more terrible than tears.

... I was allowed to move through the whole besieged Turkish sector. I was taken to the Kumsal district and trod over shattered glass into a green and white house with orange trees in the garden, and an ownerless black and white cat wandering around. The bathroom of this house was a bloodsoaked shambles with a woman and three small boys lying dead huddled together in the bath, and in an adjoining room another dead woman. My guide said this second woman and her children were the family of a Turkish major and were all shot by Greek Cypriots.
Wherever I looked in the Turkish sector there were the stark and tragic signs familiar to any town which has endured civil war. Sandbags and sentry positions, haggard men with guns whose faces behind the stubble of beard show nothing but fatigue. Men and women lying on their backs in impoverished aid centres with shot and stab wounds, gazing up blankly at a world they no longer recognise

Whoever fired the first shots in the early morning of December 22, when a Turkish man and woman were killed, there is no doubt that certain Greeks had been deliberately provoking the Turks to action. For a week or two before this, Greeks in civilian clothes had been demanding to see the identification papers of Turks in Nicosia which caused bitter resentment and when on December 23rd armed Greek police shot at Turkish school boys who booed them, the tinderbox was set aflame.

It is nonsense to claim, as the Greeks do, that all casualties were caused by fighting between armed men of both sides. On Christmas Eve many Turkish people were brutally attacked and murdered in their suburban homes, including the wife and three small children of the Turkish head of army medical services - allegedly by a group of forty men, many in army boots and greatcoats.

In this village of shame today I found grim evidence of the hatred between Greek and Turk that has bedevilled this beautiful island. A few days ago, 1,000 people lived here, in their solid, stone built homes which hug the coast road to Kyrenia, 13 miles from Nicosia. Then in a night of terror 350 villagers - men, women and children - vanished. They were all Turks. Today I was one of two British correspondents to drive to the village to investigate the mystery. In the dusty village street I found hungry Greek children playing listlessly. From doorways men and women eyed me suspiciously. When I asked where are the Turks, the women averted their gaze. The men shuffled their feet and said ‘We don’t know. They just left.’

And when I came across the Turkish homes they were an appalling sight. Apart from the walls, they just did not exist. I doubt if a napalm bomb attack could have created more devastation. I counted 40 blackened brick and concrete ‘shells’ that had once been homes. Each house had been deliberately fired by petrol. Under red tile roofs which had caved in, I found a twisted mass of bed springs, children’s cots and cribs, and ankle deep grey ashes of what had once been chairs, tables, wardrobes.
In the neighbouring village of Ayios Vassilios, a mile away, I counted 16 wrecked and burned out homes. They were all Turkish. From this village more than 100 Turks had also vanished. In neither village did I find a scrap of damage to any Greek house.

Turkish homes in the city had been set ablaze by arrows tipped with paraffin soaked rags, and hundreds of hard core EOKA men were prowling towns and villages under arms.

A sinister demonstration of EOKA power occurred during the height of the Christmas crisis at Kyrenia, the north coast harbour town. EOKA men, working with the regular Greek Cypriot police, took control of key points. These included the telephone exchange, where EOKA men with sub-machine guns made the Turkish operators leave their posts with their hands up and guns at their backs. They were told to go home and stay there. Telephone lines to most British and other foreign residents in the area were cut and these are still out of order.
EOKA groups put up road blocks in the town and on mountain roads behind it. Turkish policemen were arrested by men with guns. Four leaders of the Turkish community were arrested on Christmas Day when they arrived for a conference with the Greeks on keeping order in the town. With the policemen, they were hand-cuffed in pairs and imprisoned for seven days in a village near Kyrenia. They were told all the Turks in Kyrenia would be wiped out if Turkish forces landed in Cyprus.

Some of the heaviest fighting took place in the Turkish suburban neighbourhood of Omorphita. Dozens of homes were burned down or gutted. Greek youths can be seen pulling doors and shutters off houses. A looter’s car, nearly sagging under the weight of everything from an old refrigerator to mattresses, slowly chugged away. Curiously, some houses had not been touched. The Greeks claim the suburb was a hive of underground tunnels with caches of arms, but a British sergeant on patrol said ‘You can have my 12 months’ pay if you can find any tunnels around here’.

Discussions start in London; in Cyprus, the terror continues. Right now we are witnessing the exodus of Turks from the villages. Thousands of people abandoning homes, land, herds; Greek terrorism is relentless . This time, the rhetoric of the Hellenes and the busts of Plato do not suffice to cover up barbaric and ferocious behaviours.

Archbishop Makarios is too much of an ecclesiastic to express himself so brutally, but it is a fact that he has never openly condemned the horrible excesses committed by his partisans, leaving a delirious press the task of pursuing a campaign against the Turks . . .
According to him (Archbishop Makarios) some changes in the constitution would be enough. The trouble is that these ‘amendments’ all tend to deprive the Turks of the rights and guarantees which had been accorded to them in 1960. The Turks reply: This amounts to saying to a drowning man ‘Remove your lifebelt and everything will be all right!

If the Turkish Army has not already landed reinforcements to its Treaty Force in Cyprus, that is simply proof of the patience of Turkey. Its right to do so cannot be denied. If international treaties mean anything, Turkey can protect the Turkish Cypriot minority from further massacre. It is racial discrimination in its most bestial form. Although there have been efforts to cloud the issue by suggesting that both Cypriot communities are to blame, by far the heaviest guilt is that of the Greek Cypriot force known as Eoka or Edma.

It is a real military operation that the Greeks launched against the six thousand inhabitants of the Turkish quarter yesterday morning. A spokesman of the Greek Cypriot Government has recognized this officially. . .

His (Makarios') government deliberately provoked the clashes and is bent upon the extermination of the Turkish population . . .

Outnumbered ten to one the Turkish Cypriots packed most of their women and children into a movie theatre and school in their sector (sc. of Limassol). As their local leader, Ramazan Cemil, a Turkish member of the Cypriot House of Representatives, stated to foreign journalists after pointing out the precarious defensive position of his men. ‘We are getting ready to die'

Greek Cypriot fanatics appear bent on a policy of genocide . . .

Day by day and as murder follows murder detached observers here find it harder and harder to credit the Government of Cyprus with any real determination to stamp out violence. If the President really wants peace on earth and to restore the rule of law he could start by investigating publicly the circumstances surrounding last Thursday’s attack on the Turkish inhabitants of Limassol. The known facts are that on Wednesday the British peace keeping forces were assured by the Greek authorities that no attack would be made on the Turkish Community. Accordingly the British Army did not patrol the town. At 5.30 the following morning Greek Cypriot security forces launched what our special correspondent describes as ‘a heavy well organised attack against the Turkish quarter of Limassol’. It was carried out by hundreds of steel helmeted men armed with automatic weapons and supported by one tank and two armoured bulldozers. If the Greek Cypriot authorities connived at this formidable attack their behaviour is inexcusable. If they were ignorant of its coming they must forfeit their claim to govern and control their own people, let alone the whole Cypriot Community.

Three or four vignettes of my Cyprus days stand out sharply in my memory. A massacre took place in Limassol on the south coast in which, as I recall, about fifty Turkish Cypriots were killed - in some cases by bulldozers crushing their flimsy houses. As Makarios and I walked out of the meeting together on the second day, I said to him sharply that such beastly actions had to stop, that the previous night’s affair was intolerable, and that he must halt the violence. With amused tolerance, he replied, ‘But Mr Secretary, the Greeks and Turks have lived together for two thousand years on this island and there have always been occasional incidents; we are quite used to this.’ I was furious at such a bland reply. ‘Your Beatitude,’ I said, ‘I’ve been trying for the last two days to make the simple point that this is not the Middle Ages but the latter part of the twentieth century. The world’s not going to stand idly by and let you turn this beautiful little island into your private abattoir.’ Instead of the outburst I had expected, he said quietly, with a sad smile, ‘Oh, you’re a hard man, Mr Secretary, a very hard man!’

---

Makarios’s central interest was to block off Turkish intervention so that he and his Greek Cypriots could go on happily massacring Turkish Cypriots. Obviously we would never permit that.

---

‘The Greek Cypriots,’ I wrote, ‘do not want a peacekeeping force; they just want to be left alone to kill Turkish Cypriots.’

The Union of Cyprus with Greece required the extermination of the Turkish Cypriot community.

The 1963-64 crisis was a most unusual phenomenon: it was not a revolution by a downtrodden minority against an arrogant, oppressive majority, but a revolution by an arrogant, oppressive majority against a downtrodden minority. Makarios tried to compel the Turkish Cypriots to accept constitutional changes which would have deprived them of their political rights by launching a campaign of terror against the various Turkish Cypriot enclaves and by forcibly disarming the TMT militiamen who were protecting them. But all he succeeded in doing was to frighten the Turkish Cypriot population of many isolated and mixed villages into leaving their homes and seeking shelter in the larger Turkish Cypriot enclaves, which his ill-organised and incompetently led forces were unable to overrun. Thus his attempts to carry out the Akritas Plan almost completed the physical separation between the two communities. The Greek Cypriot leaders angrily accused the Turkish Cypriot leaders of having encouraged the process of demographic consolidation. However, the Turkish Cypriots needed no prompting to desert their burning homes or abandon villages where they lived in constant fear of being massacred. It must be added that it was in the interest of the Greek Cypriot villagers to force their Turkish Cypriot neighbours to move since they could then seize their homes, fields and orchards, and that consequently many of them did their best to encourage the exodus.

During the years leading up to 1974, when Greece was ruled by a military dictatorship, Turkish civil servants received no salaries, Turkish judges found themselves unable to enforce their judgments, Turkish villages were deprived of services, and Turkish government officers were subject to intimidation.
In short, the constitution was put aside in favour of de facto tyranny of Greek over Turk. Appalling massacres of Turkish villagers occurred, and while Archbishop

Makarios dissociated himself from the worst of these crimes, he proved unable to prevent them, and indeed often seemed quietly to condone them. Finally he was himself deposed, by the vile terrorist Nikos Samson, whose accession threw the country into civil war.
The immediate effect of the civil war was to drive Turks in thousands from their homes, and to subject them to the risk of genocide at the hands of the Eoka fanatics who now controlled much of the island. These fanatics were aided by large contingents from the mainland Greek army, which had been installed illegally during the previous years. After the Turkish intervention those Turks who could escape to the North were able at last to find refuge from danger. For the first time in more than 20 years, the Turkish community had the prospect of safety.

How can Mr Soteriades, the Greek Cypriot High Commissioner in London, defend or explain in rational terms his assertion of yesterday evening that Cyprus was ready to defend its independence and territorial integrity even if this means the start of a third world war? It ill becomes Mr Soteriades, in any case, to exclaim in horror that yesterday’s attack was unexpected. Greek Cypriot forces had been laying siege to Kokkina which is the last Turkish stronghold in the area. The Turks had made it plain that unless the siege was called off they would feel obliged to act. The siege continued and 64 Sabre jets took off. The Turkish delegate, Mr Eralp, spoke convincingly in the Security Council last night when he said that all that President Makarios wanted of the United Nations was ‘to tell the troublesome Turks not to interfere with his massacres.’ The President’s sincerity in his dealings with the United Nations has been questionable for a long time. He would not permit the UN forces (who were there to help him govern the island) to disarm civilians; he would not permit them to control or even to witness the furtive, nocturnal reinforcements of the Greek Cypriot forces. As lately as yesterday his men were preventing the UN from evacuating Turkish women and children from villages where their lives were in danger. He has protested that he cannot discover what has happened to two UN soldiers, Major Macey and Private Platt, who have been missing since early June. Since Christmas, when he first called for help, first from Britain and then from the UN, his behaviour has been scheming, deceptive and occasionally cruel as well.
Last week’s attacks on beleaguered Kokkina, attacks in which the President persisted in spite of the plainest warnings, suggest that his real object is to drive the Turks off the island or into positions in which they will be at his mercy - a quality in which many Greek Cypriots are notoriously deficient. The Greek Cypriots may have felt themselves strong enough to risk reprisals because of the reinforcements they have summoned up. It has been known for some time that the President has been recruiting ‘volunteers’ in Greece and smuggling them into the island, that the ‘volunteers’ have been armed with artillery and that their mission is to defend Cyprus against a Turkish invasion. And no one, not even President Makarios, has tried to explain how field guns can be volunteers.
The Government of Cyprus used the UN’s presence on the island as a cloak for its own warlike preparations. Now that these are complete the Government has authorised an unwarranted attack on a village which any Cypriot, from the President downwards, must have known that the Turks would be bound to defend. It was an irresponsible act and a dangerous one. By continuing to persecute the Turks in Cyprus the President was putting at risk far more than the lives of his own eager soldiers. Other outside powers besides Greece and Turkey have become interested, too, some of them at the President’s own urging. He has no right to jeopardise the peace of the whole of the Levant merely in order to assert his hold over one mountain village. Nor has he done himself or the cause of peace a service by treating with disrespect the UN forces who came at his request to help him. The UN’s good name matters to the whole world. If the President defies the United Nations he defies us all.

By 1967, Grivas obviously felt a new surge of self-confidence. His forces were stronger than ever. Although the 1960 Treaty of Alliance limited the number of Greek troops on the island to 950, as many as 20,000 of them had infiltrated into Cyprus. In addition, there was the Greek-officered National Guard, which comprised 10,000 active soldiers and 20,000 reserves. These forces were well-armed with automatic weapons, artillery and armoured vehicles, and their battle readiness had been tested in large-scale military manoeuvres in the summer of 1966. In comparison, the Turkish Cypriot side was practically defenceless. The Turkish Army contingent still comprised only the 650 men allowed by the Treaty. TMT had 5,000 men and was led by a small cadre of highly competent Turkish Army officers smuggled in for the purpose. But they were armed mostly with shotguns.

This then is a subset of my evidence that the major foctor that led to TC fleeing their homes in the period 63-74 was planned and organised violence by GC. Do you require more, for more surely exits? Will you now accept the fallacy of your claim that "It seems that your entire "independent experts" argument here is constructed around the content of one web site parts of which you insist on treating as nothing less than the "Holy Bible" of the Cyprus history and problem."? Will you now present your evidence for your claim that "TC forced TC from their homes with violence and the threat of violence" let alone that this was the major factor in the mass fleeing of TC from their homes? Can you in fact find a single article in a international press report of this time that backs up this claim? Or would you have me believe that allthough a major or the major reason TC were fleeing their homes was TC violence and threat of violence aginst them, not a single international journalist of the times (that I am aware of) realised this or reported it?

Once again I accept that there were actions taken by TC to 'prepare' safe(r) havens for TC in the evntuality of a break out of violence. I accept that some TC saw this as a political objective and stage on the way to formalised partition. I accept that TMT intimidated some TC from leaving the enclaves (once they had fled there) by use of fines and punishements and violence upto and including murder. What I do not accept is that the single largest factor in the fleeing of so many TC from their homes into enclaves in this period was not planned and organised violence by GC against the TC community.Again I assert that the single largest factor in this mass exodous of TC from their homes was GC planned and organised violence against the TC community and I believe that there is ample and cophrehensive evidence to support this claim - not just from one source but from many many sources.

Yet you insist upon it as the "ultimate reality" despite the fact that on several occasions you were presented with numbers, dates, facts and specific sources which you couldn't dispute and which indicated that there is a lot more than just your "reality".

You have presented evidence that TC perpared enclaves. This is not 'proof' that the subsequent movement of TC into these enclaves was not primarily a result of GC planned and organised violence against TC. You have claimed that TC drove TC from their homes and have presented no evidence for this that I can recall. You have claimed that TC leadership always planned to drive TC into enclaves but have not explained how this was to be done if had not been acheived by GC violence against TC community.

What you are saying is this: accept my "truth" otherwise there can never be a fair agreed settlement (whatever that means).

What I am saying is that if GC can not accept THE truth (not my truth) there is little chance of an agreed settlement imo.

In practice however your entire thesis is built on distorting or minimizing selectively historic facts with the sole aim to blame overwhelmingly one side (Greek Cypriots) over the other and thus justify Turkey's murder, looting and ethnic cleansing in 1974 as well as their ongoing occupation in the north part of Cyprus.

And in my view your entire thesis is built on disotrting or minimising or perverting the reality of what happened in the period 63-74 and the blame that should fairly be attributed to GC for this period in order to wash GC hands of any wrongdoing and present the actions of Turkey in 74 as ones with no history and as merely an unproked act of aggression and theft by Turkey against totaly (or near totaly) innocent GC.

[Kifeas]

And in my view your entire thesis is built on disotrting or minimising or perverting the reality of what happened in the period 63-74 and the blame that should fairly be attributed to GC for this period in order to wash GC hands of any wrongdoing and present the actions of Turkey in 74 as ones with no history and as merely an unproked act of aggression and theft by Turkey against totaly (or near totaly) innocent GC.

Erol,
Between the events 1963-67 in which indeed TCs suffered the most, (in fact much more in comparison to what GCs have suffered,) and the Turkish invasion of 1974, we have a period (at least from 1968 until early 1974) in which the two communities begun approaching each other, TCs were moving freely in most parts of Cyprus, worked in their properties or elsewhere and most importantly negotiations had begun between Klerides and Denktash which were almost concluded and a final agreement was almost certain should the coup and the Turkish invasion didn’t occur. I am saying all these, not because I wish to claim that those events (1963-67) should be or should have been forgotten at that or any stage, but in order to clarify (imo) the fact that the Turkish invasion of 1974 is not in direct linkage to those events, as you made it appear in your above statement, but rather as a response to the Greek junta coup.

Should an invasion had occurred at the time when the events of 1963-67 were taking place, then I would agree with your thesis. However, the invasion took place considerably later and after the two communities have started serious efforts to put those events behind, forgive, look at ways to solve their political differences in a peaceful way and eventually look ahead for a better future. The way you have presented your argument sound like from 1963 until the day Turkey invaded in 1974, GCs were constantly and continually persecuting the TCs, no effort was made to normalise the two communities relations, and it is exactly for this reason that Turkey intervened.

Never the less!
I would like to ask you if you have any comprehensive total number of TCs that were killed by GCs during all the events of 1963-67, and also the number of major events, place and time of events which resulted in brutal aggression against TC civilians in massive numbers. I am not talking here about an isolated event that one or two people from each community were engaged and perhaps one or two TCs were killed or wounded.

For example, I have in mind one such event which was the attack of Nikos Sampson irregular team against the TCs of Omorfita suburb of Nicosia (kutchuk Kaimakli,) during which serious atrocities occurred, resulting to the killing of some 50 TC civilians. If you have such comprehensive and itemised information, it will be most helpful for a further discussion.

I ask this because the mere presentation of quotations from foreign newspapers of those times is a bit confusing, since no safe conclusion can be extracted from them regarding exact place, number of people killed, date, etc. Also, perhaps more than one of those quotations that you posted, may in-fact relate to the very same incident but it appears as if it is an entirely separate event. By saying this, I do not mean to dispute the truthfulness of those foreign press descriptions.

[erolz]

Erol,
Between the events 1963-67 in which indeed TCs suffered the most, (in fact much more in comparison to what GCs have suffered,) and the Turkish invasion of 1974, we have a period (at least from 1968 until early 1974) in which the two communities begun approaching each other, TCs were moving freely in most parts of Cyprus, worked in their properties or elsewhere and most importantly negotiations had begun between Klerides and Denktash which were almost concluded and a final agreement was almost certain should the coup and the Turkish invasion didn’t occur. I am saying all these, not because I wish to claim that those events (1963-67) should be or should have been forgotten at that or any stage, but in order to clarify (imo) the fact that the Turkish invasion of 1974 is not in direct linkage to those events, as you made it appear in your above statement, but rather as a response to the Greek junta coup.

I am aware of the difference in the two period you mention and pretty much accept your description of the later period. My posts above was to back up my claim that the main (largest single) reason that TC fled their homes after 63 was in fact GC planned and organised viloence and that my 'evidence' for such claims was much more comprehensive than just the (impartial and detailed) study of this issue on Cyprus conflict website.

The way you have presented your argument sound like from 1963 until the day Turkey invaded in 1974, GCs were constantly and continually persecuting the TCs, no effort was made to normalise the two communities relations, and it is exactly for this reason that Turkey intervened.

This was not my intention (which I have tried to explain above). I accept what you say, though the coup by Greece and EOKA B was set to destroy everything that had been acheived from 68-74 and turn the clock back to the worst of the period 63-67 if not an even worse senario for TC community in Cyprus.

Never the less!
I would like to ask you if you have any comprehensive total number of TCs that were killed by GCs during all the events of 1963-67,

No I do not. The quotes above were taken from a variety of sources and I have done no such major 'analysis' of these sources in any systematic way.

I ask this because the mere presentation of quotations from foreign newspapers of those times is a bit confusing, since no safe conclusion can be extracted from them regarding exact place, number of people killed, date, etc. Also, perhaps more than one of those quotations that you posted, may in-fact relate to the very same incident but it appears as if it is an entirely separate event. By saying this, I do not mean to dispute the truthfulness of those foreign press descriptions.

My intention in posting these articles (and some undoubtedly do refer to the same event btw) was to try and show the range and depth of 'indpendent' (and G/GC) writtings about this period that support the analysis that the major reason that TC fled their homes was systematic and organised violence by GC agaist the TC community. I chose to do this, in this way, in the face of the constant denials of this by memebers here like Othellos and main source and Othellos accusations that I was intentionaly presenting a 'distorted' version of this history based on a single source with the aim of trying to legitmise the events of 74 and to refute the unsupportable claim (as far as I am concerned) that the main reason TC fled their homes after 63 was violence or threat of violence from TC extremists and all as part of some long standing plan on the part of ordinary TC to achieve partition of Cyprus.

I have no reason to doubt the reracity of any of the above quotes. They are all (relatively) easy to confirm and if there any that are not real quotes of inaccurate no one is more interested in knowing than myslef.

In terms of their use as a 'resource' for what hapened in this period (which was not my intetion in posting them) then I agree with you that they are less than ideal. Like I say they came from a number of sources and it took me considerable hours to scan, find, reformat and egenrally get them into even this inadequate (as a resource) form. To go theorugh the material I have in a more thourough and comprehnsive way that identifes seperate events etc and puts them in chronilocial order etc would probably represent many weeks of work. Despite how it may appear I do not want to harp on about the past, get into slanging matches of 'you did this, we did that' and generally drag up the horrors of the past simply for the sake of doing so or to try and score polticial points. I have only done so in this instance in the face of what I consider extreme 'provocation' in the sense of distorting and muddying the truth (in my view) by a couple of posters here who then accuse me of this very act. However if you ever want any access to any material and sources I may have here you have only to ask - that is if _you_ want to do the work I am happy to make what material I have available to you

[Othellos]

Firstly I wish to appologise in advance for the lenght of this post and even more so for the content of it. It is not my intention or desrie to provoke animosity or dredge up the past just for the sake of creating animosity. I do however feel compelled to denfend my statements and the ridiculous assertions that they are based on a 'single source'. So appologies for this post.

What is even more ridiculous is to see someone at your age behaving like a common spammer. So I will try to keep my reply as short as possible. As for your intentions or desires, I say that one should have nothing to fear as long as he / she is able to adhere to the truth and at the same time be fair.

These would be the totaly defensless GC that were murdering GC moderates, British servicemens wives, TC and many others in their 'heroic struggle'?

While the above statement suits your agenda well, I will agree that EOKA was responsible for a number of executions of innocent civilians. Yet these events constitute only a small part of the truth, most of which you seem to ignore, perhaps deliberately. Wasn't it the TMT that butchered 8 GCs from the village of Kondemenos outside Guenyeli on 12 June 1958 after they were abandoned there by British security on purpose? Weren't the British sentencing GCs into long prison terms for insignificant reasons while TCs who were arrested for serious crimes were never arrested or simply released? Wasn't it the TMT that expelled 700 GCs from Omorphita in 1958 while the British were still in full control of the island? You are still playing the same game, twisting and distorting facts selectively in order to fulfill a specific agenda.

This then is a subset of my evidence that the major foctor that led to TC fleeing their homes in the period 63-74 was planned and organised violence by GC. Do you require more, for more surely exits? Will you now accept the fallacy of your claim that "It seems that your entire "independent experts" argument here is constructed around the content of one web site parts of which you insist on treating as nothing less than the "Holy Bible" of the Cyprus history and problem."?

Your long list of quotes can come across as "impressive" at first glance for someone who knows nothing about Cyprus and what happened over here. And some of the sources you list above like "the Road to Bellapais" by Oberling, are known to be Turkish propaganda tools. But you are correct! The Cyprus conflict site is not your only source of information / or inspiration. It took me about 5 minutes to find out where the rest of your internet sources are located. Needless to say that most of your above quotes (some of which are tailored or manipulated according to Turkish excuse making needs) can be extracted from sites such as:

www.kibris.gen.tr
www.kibris.gen.tr
www.trncinfo.com
www.kbl.com.tr
www.tcn-cy.freeuk.com
www.atmg.org
www.tallarmeniantale.com/cyprus.htm

The propaganda available in some of the above sites is just unbelievable.

Will you now present your evidence for your claim that "TC forced TC from their homes with violence and the threat of violence" let alone that this was the major factor in the mass fleeing of TC from their homes? Can you in fact find a single article in a international press report of this time that backs up this claim?

Did I write that "TC forced TC from their homes with violence and the threat of violence"? Or are you rewriting my own posts again? What I have been saying in here all along is that the TC leadership "strongly encouraged" the evacuation of TCs from certain areas and their relocation into small and economically unviable areas. All this happened in the course of implementing Ankara's partition policy in Cyprus. From that point on, the TC separatist administration did all it could to keep the TC refugees from returning to their homes. According to Patrick, "on 31 October 1964, a Turkish-Cypriot refugee from Palekythro, residing at Mora, was killed, allegedly by Mora's Fighter Commander, to prevent his return to Palekythro."

Also from Patrick:
"On 6 November 1964, a shooting incident between Turk-Cypriot factions at Pitargou resulted in the wounding of several men. Apparently some Turk-Cypriots who had fled to Axylou from Pitargou returned to Pitargou, which was under government control. A group from Axylou allegedly tried to force the Turk-Cypriots In Pitargou to return to Axylou; the gun battle was the result. (United Nations, S/6102, Annex III, pp. 6-7)"

I wonder, why were these TC refugees being shot and killed by the TMT while trying to return to their homes?

Once again I accept that there were actions taken by TC to 'prepare' safe(r) havens for TC in the evntuality of a break out of violence. I accept that some TC saw this as a political objective and stage on the way to formalised partition. I accept that TMT intimidated some TC from leaving the enclaves (once they had fled there) by use of fines and punishements and violence upto and including murder.

While you accept the above, at the same time I believe that you try to bypass these events and therefore play down their significance and impact at the time they occurred.

You have presented evidence that TC perpared enclaves. This is not 'proof' that the subsequent movement of TC into these enclaves was not primarily a result of GC planned and organised violence against TC. You have claimed that TC drove TC from their homes and have presented no evidence for this that I can recall. You have claimed that TC leadership always planned to drive TC into enclaves but have not explained how this was to be done if had not been acheived by GC violence against TC community.

According to your story, the enclaves were set as "safe areas" throughout the island for the Turkish Cypriots. The preparation of these enclaves however started as early as 1958 and in this process, the forceful eviction of GCs in certain areas like Omorphita (see above) became "necessary". So according to your "logic" the Turkish side started attacking GCs in order to prepare "safe heavens" for the TCs before they were even attacked yet by GCs. This sort of "logic" that you insist upon, simply makes no sense. Claiming on the other hand that the Turkish side did prepare all these enclaves with the ethnic cleansing and partition of Cyprus in mind makes total sense.

What I am saying is that if GC can not accept THE truth (not my truth) there is little chance of an agreed settlement imo.

It is my opinion that there is a lot missing from your "truth". Contrary to what you think, I am not trying to play down or ignore any or the real suffering and hardships that thousands of TCs underwent in the past and especially between the years of 1963-1967. But at the same time I am not willing to assume all the unfair "debts" that you are so eager to dump on the GCs in order to "justify" Turkey's actions and ongoing occupation in Cyprus.

And in my view your entire thesis is built on disotrting or minimising or perverting the reality of what happened in the period 63-74 and the blame that should fairly be attributed to GC for this period in order to wash GC hands of any wrongdoing and present the actions of Turkey in 74 as ones with no history and as merely an unproked act of aggression and theft by Turkey against totaly (or near totaly) innocent GC.

I agree that there certainly were history and reasons behind Turkey's actions in 1974. But it is also my opinion that these reasons were very different from the ones you present in here.

O.

P.S: My introductory comment about you being a spammer was just a joke so do not use it against me.

O.

[gabaston]

Othellos

You state that you more or less acknowledge the hardship if thousands of Tcs 63-67.

I respectfully ask:

Are you old enough to remember these events?
If not when and how were you made aware of, and believed these events.
Do you think they are part of Turkish propaganda, or exaggerated?
Do you think that Makarios was aware of these events?
Do you believe that the majority of gc's were aware of these events?


Again i ask respectfully
Thanks

[erolz]

While the above statement suits your agenda well, I will agree that EOKA was responsible for a number of executions of innocent civilians. Yet these events constitute only a small part of the truth, most of which you seem to ignore, perhaps deliberately. Wasn't it the TMT that butchered 8 GCs from the village of Kondemenos outside Guenyeli on 12 June 1958 after they were abandoned there by British security on purpose? Weren't the British sentencing GCs into long prison terms for insignificant reasons while TCs who were arrested for serious crimes were never arrested or simply released? Wasn't it the TMT that expelled 700 GCs from Omorphita in 1958 while the British were still in full control of the island? You are still playing the same game, twisting and distorting facts selectively in order to fulfill a specific agenda.

I am playing a game of twisiting and distortion? My above was not an attempt at a complete and balanced version of the thruth but simply a reaction to your own manipulation of the truth to suit your own agenda. To claim that "TMT were used in exerting violence against GC" would be one thing. To claim that "TMT were used in exerting violence against totally defenseless GCs with Britain's tolerance and even encouragement." is another thing entirely. GC were not totaly defenseless. They had infact started the planned and systematic use of violence to achieve their poltical aims with creation of EOKA.These 'totaly innocent GC' had in fact been gunning down british troops and their inncoent wives by shooting them in the back in main streets. So much then for your comittment to the 'whole truth' and your aversion to manipulation, omission and disotrtion and selective use of facts! You seem to be totaly oblivious to your own ability to do the very things you accuse me of.

Your long list of quotes can come across as "impressive" at first glance for someone who knows nothing about Cyprus and what happened over here. And some of the sources you list above like "the Road to Bellapais" by Oberling, are known to be Turkish propaganda tools.

And the quotes from Makarios, Angelos Vlachos, Richard A Patrick,Dr Ernst Forsthoff,Grivas,George Karayiannis,DAILY EXPRESS,DAILY MAIL,THE GUARDIAN,DAILY HERALD,DAILY SKETCH, DAILY TELEGRAPH,NEW YORK HERALD TRIBUNE,IL GIORNO,LE FIGARO,WASHINGTON POST,THE CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR,THE TIMES - are these also well known Turkish propaganda tools?

But you are correct! The Cyprus conflict site is not your only source of information / or inspiration. It took me about 5 minutes to find out where the rest of your internet sources are located.

I did not use any of these sites in producing this list actually. Certainly these sites may contain much of the same indpendent reports as I gave - and why should they or would they not?

Needless to say that most of your above quotes (some of which are tailored or manipulated according to Turkish excuse making needs) can be extracted from sites such as:

If you know of any manipulation in these quotes then say so. I will be the first to appologise for using such manipulated quotes.

The propaganda available in some of the above sites is just unbelievable.

But there is no 'unbelieveable' propaganda on the RoC pio site or others? Or it is not 'unbleiveable' that TP could claim in a recent(ish) interview that no TC will killed by GC in the period 63-74?
Are you saying that my quotes are 'propaganda' by assosciation?

Did I write that "TC forced TC from their homes with violence and the threat of violence"? Or are you rewriting my own posts again?

you said :-

forced relocation or virtual imprisonment of TCs into the enclaves etc

I am not sure how you would go about forcing relocation (people from their homes) without violence or threat of violence.

What I have been saying in here all along is that the TC leadership "strongly encouraged" the evacuation of TCs from certain areas and their relocation into small and economically unviable areas. All this happened in the course of implementing Ankara's partition policy in Cyprus.

What you are saying (and have said repeatedly from memeory) is that GC violence was not the major factor in the fleeing of TC from their homes and lands (which they loved as much as any GC loves theirs pre 74 or otherwise) but in fact the main reason why so many TC left their homes (many of which where looted and burnt to the ground!) was 'strong encouragement' from the TC leadership to acheive a political objective of partition. With respect this is just insulting to the intelligence. If TP told you that in order to save Cyprus for the GC people you must leave your home and go and live for an indeterminate period of time in a tent city enclave would you go? Would you go if terrorists brtualy killed your nbeighbours and made it clear that if you did not go you may well be next?

From that point on, the TC separatist administration did all it could to keep the TC refugees from returning to their homes.

I have always accepted this was the case to some degree. We can argue for ever how extensive this policy was, and where the orders for it came from. There is certainly enough grey that I would not even to attmpt to argue this issue with you. This is why I concentrate on the less 'muddy' less 'confusbale' assertion you make about GC violence not being the major reason why TC fled their homes.

I wonder, why were these TC refugees being shot and killed by the TMT while trying to return to their homes?

It is clear that these actions were taken to aid the TC political objective of partition (just as GC violence against GC and TC was taken to achieve the poltical objective of ENOSIS). What is not clear is how widespread thi8s practice was and from what level it was orderd.

Claiming on the other hand that the Turkish side did prepare all these enclaves with the ethnic cleansing and partition of Cyprus in mind makes total sense.

It makes no sense unless you believe that the plan was to create enclaves and then for TC to force other TC into these enclaves. Again I ask you in the absense of GC violnece against TC how exactly did this 'cunning plan' intend to get the TC into these enclaves? Simply by asking people to abandon their homes and places of brith and lands they made their living from for tented slums?

It is my opinion that there is a lot missing from your "truth".

You still maintain it is untrue to assert that the major (biggest single) reason so many TC fled their homes was GC violence against them?

Contrary to what you think, I am not trying to play down or ignore any or the real suffering and hardships that thousands of TCs underwent in the past and especially between the years of 1963-1967.

Well you are doing a lousy job (and it's 10's of thousands if I am to be picky)

But at the same time I am not willing to assume all the unfair "debts" that you are so eager to dump on the GCs in order to "justify" Turkey's actions and ongoing occupation in Cyprus.

I have never asked you to assume all the 'debts'. What I have asserted and would 'settle for' (given you patent ability at confusion, obfusaction and the like) and have said so in the past, is an acceptance that in this period (and lets limit it from 63-67/68) is that GC as a community farily deserve more of the 'blame' (or 'debt'). This would be true if the blame was fairly apportioned 49% TC and 51% GC - yet still you are apparently unable to accept this?

P.S: My introductory comment about you being a spammer was just a joke so do not use it against me.

O.

Most amusing. I am beside myself with so much laughter I will simply ignore your introductory comment. (that's sacrasm just so there is no possible doubt.)