Cyprus-Forum.com

[boulio]

Even today for me personally it remains the 'acid test' for settlement proposals re governance. For me the one single question I ask myself re any proposal on governance is would such a system have allowed the TC community as a community to effectively legaly resist the imposition of enosis on it in Cyprus against its communal will or not. If it would have then it is an acceptable proposal to me and if it would not have it is an unacceptable one. This is not because I today fear having enosis imposed on me but because it is the litmus test of the core issue in this regard. I care nothing of the details as to how this achived or not, only if it is or not.

speaking of governance erolz,what did you think of the recent turkish proposals of governace?

[Piratis]

I understand in what you are saying above in people wanting their own self determination if we are talking about, say Scotland, Wales, all the states in former Yugoslavia Federation and all the Soviet satellite states and so on, but how can that be the same for the TCs in Cyprus, when we lived all over the island in a Unitary state without any particular region being ONLY Turkish Cypriot, to want to separate from the rest of the island in the search of "self determination". I know this is what the north wants to do now, now that they believe they do have their own state to seek "self determination" , but before 1974, how could the TCs gained self determination without first having had large amount of their land being in one place on the island.??? Surely this was not going to be possible, was it.??

A groups status as a people with a seperate right to self determination is not dependent solely on them having a single contigous numerical dominace within a given area. Nor does a speperate right to self determination give a peoples the right to a state of their own. What it does grant is a right to have an effective say in the decisions that shape their lives, or in other words a right to rule themselves and not be ruled by others.

The reality in Cyprus was that neither group could exercises the fullest extent of their desires without impacting the rights of the other Group, and lack of a single geographic area in cyprus where TC were situated was part of the reason for this but far from the only one. This is exactly why the compromise agreements of the 60's was based as it was and not as some would have you believe as a 'reward' for TC fulfilling the aims of foreign imperalist powers.

However the GC leadership at the time and many GC today still believe that the TC had no rights as a people to any degree of self determination as a seperate people from GC who chose define themselves not as CYpriots but as part of the Greek people. They believed and believe that GC ALONE acting as either part of the Greek people or just as GC people had the sole right to determine the future of all Cypriots without having to pay any regard for those in Cyprus they consider 'other' than Greek, because either there were more of them or because they had been their longer.

This belief that TC as a communnity have no right to control their own future or have an effective say in it in Cyprus, even when they are explicitly defined as 'seperate' as a people from the GC community by that very same community and that ONLY GC have such rights as a group of people is at the core of the CYprus problem then and still is today. It iwhy today we are still discussing 'history' and issues like enosis, because it remains the same fundamental rift between us as cypriots.

Even today for me personally it remains the 'acid test' for settlement proposals re governance. For me the one single question I ask myself re any proposal on governance is would such a system have allowed the TC community as a community to effectively legaly resist the imposition of enosis on it in Cyprus against its communal will or not. If it would have then it is an acceptable proposal to me and if it would not have it is an unacceptable one. This is not because I today fear having enosis imposed on me but because it is the litmus test of the core issue in this regard. I care nothing of the details as to how this achived or not, only if it is or not.

How about granting the same kind of powers and privileges you demand for yourselves to the Greek minority in Turkey?

The Cypriot people are not just GCs, but also Armenians, Maronites, Latins and all other minorities who live in peace together in Cyprus. We all have our one vote each and the Cypriot people as a whole take the decisions democratically. So this is not a GC VS TC thing. This is Cypriots VS TCs. During the inter-communal conflict you even expelled the Armenians from their sector of Nicosia! The poor Armenians didn't have the power to fight back. It was not enough that they had to escape to Cyprus to avoid the genocide you were commiting against them in Turkey, you wouldn't let them live in peace in Cyprus either.

[Piratis]

The reality in Cyprus was that neither group could exercises the fullest extent of their desires without impacting the rights of the other Group, and lack of a single geographic area in cyprus where TC were situated was part of the reason for this but far from the only one. This is exactly why the compromise agreements of the 60's was based as it was and not as some would have you believe as a 'reward' for TC fulfilling the aims of foreign imperalist powers.

Of course it was a reward for TC fulfilling the aims of foreign imperialist powers.

Just some years earlier Rhodes, which also has a Turkish minority, united with Greece. The same was the case with all other Greek territories which gradually united to form the Greek republic. If we go with your logic the Greek Republic should have never been created because the individual territories should not have been allowed to unite due to the presence of Muslim/Turkish minorities in them.

The fact that your minority was formed in our island as a result of foreign Imperial rule did not take away our rights. Similar minorities were created in dozens of other countries occupied by the Ottoman, British, French, Spanish etc empires, and after the liberation of those territories from their former rulers the only rights that those minorities had in those territories were their individual human rights and maybe a few minority rights. Absolutely nothing beyond this. (except in cases such as South Africa of Apartheid)

The reason that your minority was given way more than any other was not because you deserve those privileges and powers, but exactly because you helped the Imperialists get what they wanted in our island.

[erolz3]

I'm glad you finally threw in a date to show that this was THREE WHOLE YEARS after the TC ministers abandoned the RoC! What made the TC ministers think that they could come and go as they pleased?

First let me state that what happened with TC and their withdrawl from government between 63 and 65 is no where near as simple and black and white as 'TC withdrew from government to forward their agenda for partition'. It was in fact much more complex than this simple assertion.

However even if you take the simple bland assertion that TC withdrew from government to pursue a partitionsit agenda it does not negate legality or absolve GC from having to behave in legal ways. To temporarily suspend aspects of the consitution under a law of necessity for such time as TC refused to take up their positions would have been a legaly valid response. To unilateraly remove from that point onwards and forevermore the TC communites legal rights under the constiution because they withdrew from taking their posts for a period of time was and simply is not a legal response at all. This illegal permanent removal of TC rights was not some action reluctantly forced on the GC leadership as a matter of necessity by beligerent TC seeking partition, but part of a clearly laid out plan and strategy to remove those rights of the TC community. The GC leadership of the time knew there was no legal way they could achieve that which is why they drew up plans like the Akritas plan.

This is based on the TC miscalculation that by abandoning their posts the RoC constitution would be dissolved, but of course had they read the 59 agreements they would’ve found no such foolish loophole! In fact I doubt ANY country’s constitution contains such a silly self distracting clause! (ie: upon the departure of a certain number of ministers walking out!)

For three years the TC leadership tried to get implemented aspects of the 60's agreements re municipalites and re ratios in government jobs. The GC leadership refused to implement those things that it had previously agreed to, over and over despite all efforts by the TC leadership. When the TC leadership took the issue to the consitutional court, designed specificaly to LEGALY resolve such issues Makarios declared that he simply would not accept any ruling from this legaly valid court. The withdrawal of TC ministers from their posts in government needs to be seen against this backdrop of repeated attemps by the TC community to have aspects of the 60's agreements implemented and their failure to do in the face of GC leadership refusal to do so regardless of legality AND in light of the fact that intercommunal violence had broken out. Such a withdrawl was a non violent and legitimate form of protest. Such a withdrawal confered no legaly right on the GC ledaership to permanently annul TC legal communal rights. Yet this is what they did anyway.

This 'strategy' of the GC leadership 'doing nothing' in order to force a reaction from the TC leadership to 'do something' is clearly laid out in the Akritas plan. The 'do nothing' of the GC leadership was the blank refusal to implement parts of the 60s agreements. It is laid out there as clearly as the objective of unilateraly removing TC commual rights regardless of legality is laid in the same document.

[Pyrpolizer]

I must resist posting - I must resist posting - oh sod it.

I have shown time and again that the demand for enosis was a 100% legitimate one and that our struggle was turned against the colonialists, not against you.

The demand for enosis was a legitimate demand from Greeks that lived in Cyprus. It was not and is not a legitimate demand of a single unitary Cypriot people of a single unitary Cypriot nation for it says there is no such thing as a Cypriot people, just a geographical place called Cyprus that has a lot of Greeks on it and some other people who are not Greek. By saying we are Greek and part of the Greek people and nation you by definition said TC who were not Greek were part of some other people and thus had seperate rights as a people that was not Greek. The illegitimate part of Enosis was the claim that it was and is the expression of the will of a single unitary people called Cypriots. You can not both say we are not Cypriots as a people but a part of the Greek people, but we say this in the name of a Cypriot people we deny exists, yet this is what it was necessary for you to say to try and 'legitimise' your goal and force you will on cypriots in Cyprus who were not greek, depriving them of their right to self determination.

To say the struggle for enosis was turned only against colonialists is a blatant bald face lie of stunning proportions, even by your own warped standards Piratis. The struggle for enosis was turned against ALL those that represented a block and obstical for the achievement of Enosis. It attacked GC that opposed enosis, it attacked the British because they were a block on achieving enosis and it attacked TC because they were a block on enosis. Those seeking enosis did this through the 50,60 and into the 70s. That is the simple truth of the matter regardless of yopur propaganda.

It is your (TMT) actions which caused the inter-communal conflict. Just because you didn't agree with the legitimate rights of the Cypriot people this doesn't mean you had the right to attack innocent people, and demand our annihilation from half of our island.

What caused the intercommunal fighting was the fact that GC in the pursuit of enosis sought to remove any obstacles to that goal by any means including the use of illegal violence where necessary, be they GC, TC or non Cypriot. We did not have a right to block enosis by the use of violence any more than you had a right to try and achieve it through violence yet in the end this iw what both did to varying degress. What we did have is a right as a people, seperate from you as part of the Greek people to determine our own futures as a people. Enosis said you were part of the Greek peoples and in doing so it made us not part of that people and thus some other people to you. That is what enosis did and in doing so gave us a legitimate right as a people, seperate from you.

The TCs have no moral or any other excuse for a separate state on land stolen from GCs.

When you chose to define yourselves as part of the Greerk people, you by definition made us people who live in Cyprus and are NOT part of the same people as you and thus part of some 'other' people - complete with the rights of a people seperate from you. Those rights do not include a right to a seperate homeland but they did and do include the right to say that some other people can not impose on us a future for us and our country which we do not want and in which we have no effective say at all.

They didn't have any moral ground for the disproportionally high powers and privileges that were granted to them by the Imperialists in 1960.

Here we get to the nub of the issue and expose your claim to place 'legality' above all else as the BS that it truely is. The rights granted to the TC community in Cyprus in the 1960 agreements may well have been 'unfair' but the fact is and remains that however unfair they were they were also LEGALLY VALID in EVERY sense of the word. Law and especially international law can be and often is 'unfair' yet it remains LEGALLY VALID. The argument that they are 'invalidated' because they were the result of 'unequal barganning power' of those that were a party to them holds no water legally. It highlights the very essential difference between national law and international law. International law is by definition an expression of the interests of states expressed through bi lateral and multi lateral agreements. Every international agreement between states is the result of 'unequal power' of those signing the agreements but they remain LEGALY VALID none the less for if they were not then every and any international agreement could be challenged on the basis that 'we had less power than the other signatories, therefore our solemen signature on the agreement means nothing'. To then say that because YOU deem these signed agreements as unfair you can without recourse to ANY legal process simply decide that this and that aspect of them are 'invlid' but not other aspects that suit your needs and enforce this unilateral decision using violence just shows how much you REALLY respect law and legality, national and international.

There was and is no LEGAL way to remove the, possibly unfair but totaly LEGAL, rights granted to the TC community in the 60's agreements without the TC communities consent. This is why GC leaderships have never challenged these legal rights of the TC community in any international court of law but instead drew up a plan for their illegal removal using deception, subversion and as necessary ethnic violence.

Both are ill received gains, which the TCs got by collaborating with foreign Imperialists. The TCs help the foreign Imperialists serve their interests in Cyprus, and in return the foreign Imperialist grand to the TCs gains on our expense. None of this is moral.

This idea that we coluded with imperial powers to thwart you is also BS in the sense that you did exactly the same and to much greater reward in the end. It was YOU that sought to internationalise the problem in the first place, taking the cyprus problem to the UN in the 50's. Whilst you failed to get what you hoped to get in the 60's agreements through the use of collaboration with imperial powers and the exploiting of their self interest, you subsequently got massive gains, despite all morality and legality, at the expense of the TC community from foreign imperialist powers persuing their own self interest in 1964 with the UN decleration. The imperalist powers at that time cared only for heading off direct conflict between the NATO allies of Greece and Turkey. The easiest means for those powers to meet THEIR self interest was to place UN troops in Cyprus and the only way to do this was to accept the 'legitimacy' of an all GC run government in Cyprus.

Thus the biggest 'gain' the GC community gained over the TC community in Cyprus was the result of the GC helping foreign imperialist powers to serve their own self interests despite all legality and in return being granted 'legitimacy' at the expense of TC community. None of this was moral, but as it was to your advantage none of it needs understanding or scrutiny.

What the TCs have right for is to be equal Cypriot citizens, with the 100% of their human and democratic rights.

No Piratis, what we LEGALLY have a right to as a community in Cyprus is what is defined in the LEGALY VALID 1960's agreements. If you have those rights removed by some sort of international LEGAL process then fine I will accept that they are not any more LEGALLY valid. However if you simply declare unilateraly that those LEGAL rights are 'unfair' to you and thus you can arbitarily remove them at will and without any legal process then I will not accept such a claim. That you subsequently managed to exploit the self interest of foreign imperial powers to first tacitly and then explicity recognise an all GC run government in Cyprus as 'legitimate', despite its planned illegal use of ethinc violence against the TC community to remove those LEGAL rights does not change the fact that our RIGHTS as a COMMUNITY are LEGALY defined in LEAGLLY VALID international agreements.

If the TCs continue to dream that they are the winners, then in reality they will continue to be the biggest losers. Only when they will realize that they can not gain on our expense we will be able to find a solution. If they insist on having gains on our expense, then we will lose, but they will lose even more.

Whilst you continue to dream that you can simply get away with the illegal removal of the TC communities valid legal rights as a community and without consequence then you and us will continue to be loosers and their will be no winners. Only when you realise that you have ALREADY gained at our expesne when you sucsessfully manipulated the self interests of foreign imperialists powers to gain 'recognition' at our expense, despite legality and as a result of your use of illegal ethinc violence against us will we have a chance of finding a solution. If you insit that everything YOU gained at our expense by the use of illegal ethic violence against us and the sucsessful exploitation of the self iterest of foreign imperalist powers to your favour, is yours to keep but everything you lost via the same means must be returned then we will lose and you will lose. This is where we have been since 1964 and remain today.

The desire for enosis amongst the general GC community may well be nigh on dead today. What is NOT dead today is the continued belief that GC alone acting not as Cypriots but as Greeks living in Cyprus and in the pursuit not of Cypriot goals but in the pursuit of Greek goals have the RIGHT to impose such a Greek will on those in Cyprus who are not Greek and with no regard for those non Greek Cypriots and without them having any rioghts themselves as Cypriots who are NOT greek. It is a belief born of a world view that says Cyprus IS Greek and anything in it that is not Greek is 'invalid'. That continues to be a problem today.

Anyway the above was a moment of weakness. I already know what your replies will be Piratis. Such discussions here can achieve nothing of any material use. I WILL be stronger in the future and resist such pointless expenditure of effort, reserving it for things than have a least some realistic chance of making things in CYprus better and not worse.

Is this political Philosophy or Political Sofistry?

Your axiom says that a minority scattered all over territorially can have (applicable) self determination rights. Far from the truth. It happened nowhere on this planet. Your axiom is wrong therefore your whole theory is wrong. In such cases only the majority has (applicable) self determination rights.

[Piratis]

I'm glad you finally threw in a date to show that this was THREE WHOLE YEARS after the TC ministers abandoned the RoC! What made the TC ministers think that they could come and go as they pleased?

First let me state that what happened with TC and their withdrawl from government between 63 and 65 is no where near as simple and black and white as 'TC withdrew from government to forward their agenda for partition'. It was in fact much more complex than this simple assertion.

However even if you take the simple bland assertion that TC withdrew from government to pursue a partitionsit agenda it does not negate legality or absolve GC from having to behave in legal ways. To temporarily suspend aspects of the consitution under a law of necessity for such time as TC refused to take up their positions would have been a legaly valid response. To unilateraly remove from that point onwards and forevermore the TC communites legal rights under the constiution because they withdrew from taking their posts for a period of time was and simply is not a legal response at all. This illegal permanent removal of TC rights was not some action reluctantly forced on the GC leadership as a matter of necessity by beligerent TC seeking partition, but part of a clearly laid out plan and strategy to remove those rights of the TC community. The GC leadership of the time knew there was no legal way they could achieve that which is why they drew up plans like the Akritas plan.

This is based on the TC miscalculation that by abandoning their posts the RoC constitution would be dissolved, but of course had they read the 59 agreements they would’ve found no such foolish loophole! In fact I doubt ANY country’s constitution contains such a silly self distracting clause! (ie: upon the departure of a certain number of ministers walking out!)

For three years the TC leadership tried to get implemented aspects of the 60's agreements re municipalites and re ratios in government jobs. The GC leadership refused to implement those things that it had previously agreed to, over and over despite all efforts by the TC leadership. When the TC leadership took the issue to the consitutional court, designed specificaly to LEGALY resolve such issues Makarios declared that he simply would not accept any ruling from this legaly valid court. The withdrawal of TC ministers from their posts in government needs to be seen against this backdrop of repeated attemps by the TC community to have aspects of the 60's agreements implemented and their failure to do in the face of GC leadership refusal to do so regardless of legality AND in light of the fact that intercommunal violence had broken out. Such a withdrawl was a non violent and legitimate form of protest. Such a withdrawal confered no legaly right on the GC ledaership to permanently annul TC legal communal rights. Yet this is what they did anyway.

This 'strategy' of the GC leadership 'doing nothing' in order to force a reaction from the TC leadership to 'do something' is clearly laid out in the Akritas plan. The 'do nothing' of the GC leadership was the blank refusal to implement parts of the 60s agreements. It is laid out there as clearly as the objective of unilateraly removing TC commual rights regardless of legality is laid in the same document.

So you collaborated with the foreign Imperialists in order for them to grand you unfair privileges on our expense, and then you couldn't enjoy all of those unfair privileges.

The "government jobs" you are talking about are actually civil servant positions. The Imperialists granted to your minority of 18% the 30% of those positions, meaning that a TC would have twice as much chances of getting such a position than a GC. This was obviously racist and unfair and it was not implemented.

Such racist laws that discriminated against specific ethnic groups existed in many countries. E.g. in the USA against the African Americans, or in South Africa against the Blacks. Those who refused to follow such laws and fought for their change are nothing less than heroes.

You had such laws when you were ruling Cyprus during Ottoman empire as well. When Christians were treated like shit with no rights. It was the "law" back then as well.

So yes, sorry for fighting for justice against the racist and unfair laws that you and your Imperialist friends imposed against the vast majority of the population of our island.

[Piratis]

I must resist posting - I must resist posting - oh sod it.

I have shown time and again that the demand for enosis was a 100% legitimate one and that our struggle was turned against the colonialists, not against you.

The demand for enosis was a legitimate demand from Greeks that lived in Cyprus. It was not and is not a legitimate demand of a single unitary Cypriot people of a single unitary Cypriot nation for it says there is no such thing as a Cypriot people, just a geographical place called Cyprus that has a lot of Greeks on it and some other people who are not Greek. By saying we are Greek and part of the Greek people and nation you by definition said TC who were not Greek were part of some other people and thus had seperate rights as a people that was not Greek. The illegitimate part of Enosis was the claim that it was and is the expression of the will of a single unitary people called Cypriots. You can not both say we are not Cypriots as a people but a part of the Greek people, but we say this in the name of a Cypriot people we deny exists, yet this is what it was necessary for you to say to try and 'legitimise' your goal and force you will on cypriots in Cyprus who were not greek, depriving them of their right to self determination.

To say the struggle for enosis was turned only against colonialists is a blatant bald face lie of stunning proportions, even by your own warped standards Piratis. The struggle for enosis was turned against ALL those that represented a block and obstical for the achievement of Enosis. It attacked GC that opposed enosis, it attacked the British because they were a block on achieving enosis and it attacked TC because they were a block on enosis. Those seeking enosis did this through the 50,60 and into the 70s. That is the simple truth of the matter regardless of yopur propaganda.

It is your (TMT) actions which caused the inter-communal conflict. Just because you didn't agree with the legitimate rights of the Cypriot people this doesn't mean you had the right to attack innocent people, and demand our annihilation from half of our island.

What caused the intercommunal fighting was the fact that GC in the pursuit of enosis sought to remove any obstacles to that goal by any means including the use of illegal violence where necessary, be they GC, TC or non Cypriot. We did not have a right to block enosis by the use of violence any more than you had a right to try and achieve it through violence yet in the end this iw what both did to varying degress. What we did have is a right as a people, seperate from you as part of the Greek people to determine our own futures as a people. Enosis said you were part of the Greek peoples and in doing so it made us not part of that people and thus some other people to you. That is what enosis did and in doing so gave us a legitimate right as a people, seperate from you.

The TCs have no moral or any other excuse for a separate state on land stolen from GCs.

When you chose to define yourselves as part of the Greerk people, you by definition made us people who live in Cyprus and are NOT part of the same people as you and thus part of some 'other' people - complete with the rights of a people seperate from you. Those rights do not include a right to a seperate homeland but they did and do include the right to say that some other people can not impose on us a future for us and our country which we do not want and in which we have no effective say at all.

They didn't have any moral ground for the disproportionally high powers and privileges that were granted to them by the Imperialists in 1960.

Here we get to the nub of the issue and expose your claim to place 'legality' above all else as the BS that it truely is. The rights granted to the TC community in Cyprus in the 1960 agreements may well have been 'unfair' but the fact is and remains that however unfair they were they were also LEGALLY VALID in EVERY sense of the word. Law and especially international law can be and often is 'unfair' yet it remains LEGALLY VALID. The argument that they are 'invalidated' because they were the result of 'unequal barganning power' of those that were a party to them holds no water legally. It highlights the very essential difference between national law and international law. International law is by definition an expression of the interests of states expressed through bi lateral and multi lateral agreements. Every international agreement between states is the result of 'unequal power' of those signing the agreements but they remain LEGALY VALID none the less for if they were not then every and any international agreement could be challenged on the basis that 'we had less power than the other signatories, therefore our solemen signature on the agreement means nothing'. To then say that because YOU deem these signed agreements as unfair you can without recourse to ANY legal process simply decide that this and that aspect of them are 'invlid' but not other aspects that suit your needs and enforce this unilateral decision using violence just shows how much you REALLY respect law and legality, national and international.

There was and is no LEGAL way to remove the, possibly unfair but totaly LEGAL, rights granted to the TC community in the 60's agreements without the TC communities consent. This is why GC leaderships have never challenged these legal rights of the TC community in any international court of law but instead drew up a plan for their illegal removal using deception, subversion and as necessary ethnic violence.

Both are ill received gains, which the TCs got by collaborating with foreign Imperialists. The TCs help the foreign Imperialists serve their interests in Cyprus, and in return the foreign Imperialist grand to the TCs gains on our expense. None of this is moral.

This idea that we coluded with imperial powers to thwart you is also BS in the sense that you did exactly the same and to much greater reward in the end. It was YOU that sought to internationalise the problem in the first place, taking the cyprus problem to the UN in the 50's. Whilst you failed to get what you hoped to get in the 60's agreements through the use of collaboration with imperial powers and the exploiting of their self interest, you subsequently got massive gains, despite all morality and legality, at the expense of the TC community from foreign imperialist powers persuing their own self interest in 1964 with the UN decleration. The imperalist powers at that time cared only for heading off direct conflict between the NATO allies of Greece and Turkey. The easiest means for those powers to meet THEIR self interest was to place UN troops in Cyprus and the only way to do this was to accept the 'legitimacy' of an all GC run government in Cyprus.

Thus the biggest 'gain' the GC community gained over the TC community in Cyprus was the result of the GC helping foreign imperialist powers to serve their own self interests despite all legality and in return being granted 'legitimacy' at the expense of TC community. None of this was moral, but as it was to your advantage none of it needs understanding or scrutiny.

What the TCs have right for is to be equal Cypriot citizens, with the 100% of their human and democratic rights.

No Piratis, what we LEGALLY have a right to as a community in Cyprus is what is defined in the LEGALY VALID 1960's agreements. If you have those rights removed by some sort of international LEGAL process then fine I will accept that they are not any more LEGALLY valid. However if you simply declare unilateraly that those LEGAL rights are 'unfair' to you and thus you can arbitarily remove them at will and without any legal process then I will not accept such a claim. That you subsequently managed to exploit the self interest of foreign imperial powers to first tacitly and then explicity recognise an all GC run government in Cyprus as 'legitimate', despite its planned illegal use of ethinc violence against the TC community to remove those LEGAL rights does not change the fact that our RIGHTS as a COMMUNITY are LEGALY defined in LEAGLLY VALID international agreements.

If the TCs continue to dream that they are the winners, then in reality they will continue to be the biggest losers. Only when they will realize that they can not gain on our expense we will be able to find a solution. If they insist on having gains on our expense, then we will lose, but they will lose even more.

Whilst you continue to dream that you can simply get away with the illegal removal of the TC communities valid legal rights as a community and without consequence then you and us will continue to be loosers and their will be no winners. Only when you realise that you have ALREADY gained at our expesne when you sucsessfully manipulated the self interests of foreign imperialists powers to gain 'recognition' at our expense, despite legality and as a result of your use of illegal ethinc violence against us will we have a chance of finding a solution. If you insit that everything YOU gained at our expense by the use of illegal ethic violence against us and the sucsessful exploitation of the self iterest of foreign imperalist powers to your favour, is yours to keep but everything you lost via the same means must be returned then we will lose and you will lose. This is where we have been since 1964 and remain today.

The desire for enosis amongst the general GC community may well be nigh on dead today. What is NOT dead today is the continued belief that GC alone acting not as Cypriots but as Greeks living in Cyprus and in the pursuit not of Cypriot goals but in the pursuit of Greek goals have the RIGHT to impose such a Greek will on those in Cyprus who are not Greek and with no regard for those non Greek Cypriots and without them having any rioghts themselves as Cypriots who are NOT greek. It is a belief born of a world view that says Cyprus IS Greek and anything in it that is not Greek is 'invalid'. That continues to be a problem today.

Anyway the above was a moment of weakness. I already know what your replies will be Piratis. Such discussions here can achieve nothing of any material use. I WILL be stronger in the future and resist such pointless expenditure of effort, reserving it for things than have a least some realistic chance of making things in CYprus better and not worse.

Is this political Philosophy or Political Sofistry?

Your axiom says that a minority scattered all over territorially can have (applicable) self determination rights. Far from the truth. It happened nowhere on this planet. Your axiom is wrong therefore your whole theory is wrong. In such cases only the majority has (applicable) self determination rights.

It happened in South Africa of Apartheid. This is the model that racists like Erol aspire to. Failing that, their model is the Ottoman conquests and subsequent ethnic cleansing/genocide, so they can Turkify by force a territory stolen from others.

[erolz3]

In the 50s you collaborated with foreign imperialists, attacked us, threatened us with annihilating us from half of our island and as a reward the foreign Imperialists granted to you unfair and disproportional gains on our expense.

The GC leadership was of course not collaborating with the foreign imperialist power of Greece in order to try and secure the annexation of Cyprus and all its people to the Greek nation ? You of course used no violence or threats of violence or actual violence against us.

You can shout 'unfair' 'unfair' and 'foreign imperilaists' 'foreign imperalists' till you are blue in the face and no doubt will. It does not change the FACT that the RIGHTS granted to the TC community in the 1960's AGREEMENTS were LEAGLY VALID in every and any sense of the meaning of such words.

In 1963 you simply lost those unfair gains. This was not any "gain" for us, but just a the negation of the previous injustice against us.

We did not 'simply loose our legal valid rights' like we somehow left them on a bus and forgot where we put them. We had them taken from us by a GC leadership following a laid out pre defined planned as to how to do so, a plan the recognised there was no legal means of removing them and thus sought to use deception, trickery and where necessary illegal ethinc violence.

I will say once more that just because you considered these LEGALY VALID rights to be unfair that does NOT confer on you a right to use deception, trickery and ethinc violence to remove them. There are any number of laws withing the TRNC or the RoC or the UK that I consider to be 'unfair'. That does not however give me a right to start killing people in order to have these laws removed.

You say that you losing those ill received gains was something "illegal". Show me the court case you won about this to prove it.

I am afriad Piratis this is not how it works. If the rights granted to the TC community were as you claim so unfair as to make them legaly invalid then why did a GC leadership not choose to use legal means to remove them, but instead drew up a secret plan of deception, trickery and ethnic violence to do so?

I can show you a case where TC sought to have aspects of their legal rights confirmed by a valid court of law, the case when they took the issue of municipalites to the Cypriot consitutional court. Just as I can show you Makarios refusal to abide by that legal courts rulings when it upheld the TC communites rights in this regard, leading to the destruction of said court in the process.

Just like you managed to legalize unfair gains on our expense in 1960, we managed to restore justice in 100% legal way.

That you can even dare to claim that the way the TC communites legaly vaild rights under the 60's agreements were removed from them was '100% legal' just shows how clearly delusional you are. I understand your need to beleieve this is so, but it does not make it so.

You played with the system to have unfair gains, and we played with the system too, not to gain anything unfair on your expense - as you had done, but simply to restore justice.

We gained legaly valid rights under the 60's agreements and you set out and implemented a secret plan to remove those rights using deception, trickery and where necessary ethic violence. Of course our legaly vaild rights were 'invalid' and you illegal means of removing them were just a 'restoration of justice' - and all beacause YOU say so.

So don't tell me that we "made" you separate in the 50s with our struggle for enosis.

I am telling you a plain and simple truth. That you find that truth unplalatable and it is something you are incapable of accepting does not change its reality.

Indpedance of Cyprus was and is a cause that can validly be persued in the name of single unitary Cypriot people.

Annexation / union of Cyprus to Greece was and is a cause that can only be validly claimed in the name of Greeks that are an indivsable part of the Greek people as far as self determination goes and not in the name of a single unitary people of a cypriot nation that enosis itself says does not exist.

I KNOW these truths are painful to you piratis and they mess with your head but they are truths none the less.

Your idea that ethnic minorities have the right to ethnically cleanse others and steal their lands whenever they don't agree with the majority is obviously a load of bullshit. I don't need to say more on this, since there are UN resolutions and several court cases that prove this.

As ever Piratis when you are done disagreeing with things I have said you then add in for good measure countering things I have not and have never said. No where have I said that the rights of the TC community either as a community within cyprus or a people seperate to the Greek people living in Cyprus have a right to ethically cleanse or steal land.

What I do say is clear and simple and I have said it over and over again. As long as you are intelectually incapable of accepting that TC had and have a right to determine their own futures in their own homeland along with GC that historicaly chose to define themselves as part of the Greek people then we are no closer to a solution in cyprus than we were in 55,60,63, 65,74,78,85, 2004 or now.

[erolz3]

Is this political Philosophy or Political Sofistry?

Your axiom says that a minority scattered all over territorially can have (applicable) self determination rights. Far from the truth. It happened nowhere on this planet. Your axiom is wrong therefore your whole theory is wrong. In such cases only the majority has (applicable) self determination rights.

http://130.94.183.89/parker/selfdet.html

http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_a ... index.html

[Pyrpolizer]

>>>>>