Cyprus-Forum.com

[Truth]

Is this an official British Government website:

http://boxstr.com/files/4581351_adyoc/H ... Cyprus.zip

????

You would think they would use the official British Government Website.

As Oracle said, they are just going to have to prove this alleged legislation, from an official source such as the Republic of Cyprus Parliamentary archives.

Yessssss!
Paphitis has finally got it.

[Oracle]

Is this an official British Government website:

http://boxstr.com/files/4581351_adyoc/H ... Cyprus.zip

????

You would think they would use the official British Government Website.

As Oracle said, they are just going to have to prove this alleged legislation, from an official source such as the Republic of Cyprus Parliamentary archives.

Yessssss!
Paphitis has finally got it.

No ... perhaps you have finally got it.

We have told you all along, it is some-one's opinion.

First you presented a quote as proof and we saw it was quoted by Stephens. Then you say it was in a Parliamentary report, which looks extremely iffy!

There is no reference to any evidence which would be a prerequisite if this was with foundations.

So you are making a claim, which we have shot down many-fold, therefore it's up to YOU to GO AND FIND THE EVIDENCE ... then come back and tell us and stop perpetuating this propaganda!

[Paphitis]

Is this an official British Government website:

http://boxstr.com/files/4581351_adyoc/H ... Cyprus.zip

????

You would think they would use the official British Government Website.

As Oracle said, they are just going to have to prove this alleged legislation, from an official source such as the Republic of Cyprus Parliamentary archives.

Yessssss!
Paphitis has finally got it.

The report is not acceptable, as it claims that the RoC had unaminously passed a resoultion for ENOSIS.

You will need to prove the validity of this claim by obtaining evidence from the official Republic of Cyprus Parliamentary archives.

[Truth]

I don't care what and from where, your little piece of paper derives.

You can send an email to [email protected] and they will send you a pdf copy. Ask for "House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee report on Cyprus 2 July 1987".

How do we know there isn't an erratum or disclaimer elsewhere? Or that it was discussed further down the line, since someone has brought it up, but lacked evidence, and then it was thrown out. Such as we have been doing all along!

That's a very good homework for you Oracle!
Why don't you do that?

[Oracle]

Is this an official British Government website:

http://boxstr.com/files/4581351_adyoc/H ... Cyprus.zip

????

You would think they would use the official British Government Website.

As Oracle said, they are just going to have to prove this alleged legislation, from an official source such as the Republic of Cyprus Parliamentary archives.

Paphitis, read carefully what I wrote. I did not say anything about us having to prove anything.

Don't go by "Truth"'s interpretation. He is a skilled liar.

There is no reference to this statement, hence no evidence and it was probably a foundation-less attempt to sow seeds which Stephens and "Truth" can use in just this way.

I suggest we ignore him till he comes up with proof .. and this quote is unreferenced (look carefully, compare it to the above and below statements ... all other major claims have a reference) ... so it is propaganda.

[Truth]

The report is not acceptable, as it claims that the RoC had unaminously passed a resoultion for ENOSIS.

Brilliant!
"The report is not acceptable"!?!?!?!?
Is anything that does not fit into your secterian worldview acceptable?

[Truth]

Paphitis, read carefully what I wrote. I did not say anything about us having to prove anything.

Don't go by "Truth"'s interpretation. He is a skilled liar.

Do I sense signs of panic here or what?

Remember who was the liar?

Oracle wrote:
"Enosis was never the official, nor un-official policy, of ANY Cypriot government, let alone "successive" governments."

Nikitas wrote:
"So we can all agree that the Enosis goal was abandoned by 1968, not only by Cyprus, but also by Greece as evidenced by the Evros agreement."

Paphitis wrote:
"I was referring to the 12,000 Greek troops deploying to Cyprus in order to facilitate ENOSIS..."
"The 12,000 Greek troops deployed to Cyprus to facilitate double union.. This is what was referred to by Nikitas and was admitted to by Papandreou and Mitsotakis."

I will repeat once again:

Dear Oracle! If I were you, I would stop making a spectacle of myself.

[Truth]

Sry. Just editing a spelling mistake.

[CBBB]

Every detail in this document is substantiated with refererences, except the claim that in June 1967 the parliament unaminously voted for Enosis.

Why?

[Paphitis]

Oracle Wrote:

Paphitis, read carefully what I wrote. I did not say anything about us having to prove anything.

I didn't either.

I said the onus is on them to substantiate and prove this false claim.

I suggest we ignore him till he comes up with proof .. and this quote is unreferenced (look carefully, compare it to the above and below statements ... all other major claims have a reference) ... so it is propaganda.

Thanks for the info.

It is not referenced because there is no resolution passed by the RoC parliament. Hence my demands for "TRUTH" to substantiate the claim, from an official RoC source.