Cyprus-Forum.com

[christos1]

Turkey censured for human rights abuses in Cyprus

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 84336.html

[christos1]

From the UN website:

Turkey's occupation of the northern part of Cyprus
Inhumanity and injustice prolonged

http://www.un.int/cyprus/pr27.01.htm

[christos1]

The court considered that the violence inflicted on the applicant, taken as a whole and having regard to its duration and purpose, had been particularly serious and cruel and capable of causing 'severe' pain and suffering. It should therefore be classified as torture," the tribunal said in a statement.

http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/news/htm ... RIGHTS.asp

[christos1]

European rights court condemns Turkey for torture

The European Court of Human Rights has found Turkey guilty of violating human rights in the torture of a man in police custody, including the use of electric shock and death threats.

http://www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/arti ... wsid=51096
http://www.eutcc.org/articles/11/document235.ehtml

[insan]

The history of Cyprus during these centuries is one of
continual conflict between the Greek colonists and the
Phoenicians and their masters, the Persians ; at one time we
find the island assisting Persia against the Greeks with a large
fleet ; at another, Greek forces land in Cyprus and succeed fcr
a time in wresting a portion of it from the Persians, only to
lose it again.* We have hitherto referred to the island as if
it were one kingdom, but from the earliest times it had been
divided into a number of petty, semi-independent princi-
paUties, owing a shadowy allegiance to the important kingdom
of Salamis. There were, probably, in the population at
this time two dominant elements — one Cyprian or native,
with Greek proclivities, and the other Phoenician, essentially
Asiatic ; each had its own peculiar alphabet and language,
which alone figure on the coins of the island up to this period.

The population of the island at this time was about 186,000,
of which some two-thirds were Greek-speaking and the
remainder Turkish, with a sprinkling of Syrians, Armenians,
and other nationalities.

The substitution of a British for an Ottoman administration
was warmly welcomed by the Christian inhabitants, a depu-
tation from whom, headed by the venerable Archbishop of
the Autocephalous Church of Cyprus, waited upon Sir Garnet
VVolseley on his arrival and presented him with an address.
The Turkish community accepted the change with Oriental
resignation, if not with enthusiasm, secure in the knowledge
that they were retaining their rights and privileges as Ottoman
subjects, and that Cyprus remained an integral part of the
Ottoman Empire.

http://www.archive.org/stream/cyprusund ... c_djvu.txt

[insan]

The history of Cyprus during these centuries is one of
continual conflict between the Greek colonists and the
Phoenicians and their masters, the Persians ; at one time we
find the island assisting Persia against the Greeks with a large
fleet ; at another, Greek forces land in Cyprus and succeed fcr
a time in wresting a portion of it from the Persians, only to
lose it again.* We have hitherto referred to the island as if
it were one kingdom, but from the earliest times it had been
divided into a number of petty, semi-independent princi-
paUties, owing a shadowy allegiance to the important kingdom
of Salamis. There were, probably, in the population at
this time two dominant elements — one Cyprian or native,
with Greek proclivities, and the other Phoenician, essentially
Asiatic ; each had its own peculiar alphabet and language,
which alone figure on the coins of the island up to this period.

The population of the island at this time was about 186,000,
of which some two-thirds were Greek-speaking and the
remainder Turkish, with a sprinkling of Syrians, Armenians,
and other nationalities.

The substitution of a British for an Ottoman administration
was warmly welcomed by the Christian inhabitants, a depu-
tation from whom, headed by the venerable Archbishop of
the Autocephalous Church of Cyprus, waited upon Sir Garnet
VVolseley on his arrival and presented him with an address.
The Turkish community accepted the change with Oriental
resignation, if not with enthusiasm, secure in the knowledge
that they were retaining their rights and privileges as Ottoman
subjects, and that Cyprus remained an integral part of the
Ottoman Empire.

http://www.archive.org/stream/cyprusunderbriti00orrc
/cyprusunderbriti00orrc_djvu.txt

Good read. The Turks were where? In Beijing? Alexander the Great also colonized Cyprus more then a millenia ago as well...spreading Hellenism where ever he went. Listen, with the links you post from Slavic FYRoM sites...i assume you like they believe that their Slavic language is actually written on the Rosetta stone? The problem with you is that your a village idiot...its that simple. The Greeks colonized this island thousands of years ago? You dont say? Here you go you stupid idiot:

http://www.kypros.org/Cyprus/history.html

Where are the Turks? In your links...where are you guys? Get off the Hellenic c@ck.

[christos1]

Here is the icing on the cake. An article by Gene Rossides. You keep mentioning his name so figure i google the name and found this wonderful piece. Didnt realize who he was until you mentioned him Zan. I will post more of his work tomorrow. Good night all!!

http://www.helleniccomserve.com/ahiturk ... aug05.html


Turkey’s War Crimes

By Gene Rossides

Turkey committed war crimes by its illegal invasion of Cyprus on July 20, 1974 when it occupied 4 percent of Cyprus’ territory with the illegal use of American-supplied arms and equipment; and again in the second wave of its invasion on August 14-16, 1974, when it breached a UN cease fire and UN sponsored negotiations, three weeks after the legitimate government of Cyprus had been restored, with a massive attack on the Greek Cypriots and grabbed another 33 percent of Cyprus’ territory.

The European Commission on Human Rights issued a devastating report on July 10, 1976 on two applications by the government of Cyprus regarding Turkey’s invasion of Cyprus.

On January 23, 1977, the London Sunday Times published excerpts from the report and stated: "It amounts to a massive indictment of the Ankara government for the murder, rape and looting by its army in Cyprus during and after the Turkish invasion of summer 1974."

The European Convention on Human Rights is, by the terms of its preamble, an extension of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948. The Commission’s report of July 10, 1976 found Turkey guilty of violating the following articles of the European Convention on Human Rights:

Article 2—by the killing of innocent civilians committed on a substantial scale;

Article 3—by the rape of women of all ages from 12-71;

Article 3—by inhuman treatment of prisoners and persons detained;

Article 5—by deprivation of liberty with regard to detainees and missing persons—a continuing violation;

Article 8—by displacement of persons creating more than 170,000 Greek Cypriot refugees, and by refusing to allow the refugees to return to their homes—a continuing violation;

Article 1 of the First Protocol to the Convention—by deprivation of possessions, looting and robbery on an extensive scale.


Who in the Turkish government are responsible for these war crimes? The Prime Minister of Turkey at that time was Bulent Ecevit. He gave the order of the invasion on the recommendation of the Turkish National Security Council which made the decisions on national security, defense and foreign affairs at that time. General Kenan Evren and a majority of its members were military officers.

Then Prime Minister Ecevit, General Evren, the other members of Turkey’s National Security Council and the Turkish army commander in Cyprus all bear responsibility for these war crimes.

What has the United States, Britain, the UN and the international community done about these war crimes? Nothing!

Why was no action taken? The answer involves a combination of points. Turkey was a NATO ally; the U.S. was an accomplice to the invasion through the actions of then Secretary of State Henry Kissinger; and Britain, a guarantor power, had economic interests in Turkey and still harbored resentment against the Greek Cypriots, the 80 percent majority of Cypriots, for seeking self-determination and freedom from Britain in the 1950’s. Further, the U.S. and Britain, permanent members of the UN Security Council, had veto powers.

The UN Security Council and General Assembly passed a number of resolutions following Turkey’s invasion of Cyprus. In summation, the resolutions called upon all states to respect the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Cyprus, demanded the immediate end to foreign occupation and urged "the speedy withdrawal of all foreign armed forces and foreign military presence and personnel from Cyprus and the cessation of all foreign interference in its affairs."

The UN however did not call for military action or economic sanctions against Turkey if Turkey did not comply with the UN resolutions, as the UN did regarding Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait in 1990.

It is worth recalling that President Dwight D. Eisenhower condemned and reversed the invasion of Egypt by Britain, France and Israel in October of 1956. In his October 31, 1956 television and radio report to the nation on the Middle East crisis, Eisenhower said:

"We believe these actions to have been taken in error, for we do not accept the use of force as a wise or proper instrument for the settlement of international disputes.

* * * * *

In all the recent troubles in the Middle East there have, indeed, been injustices suffered by all nations involved. But I do not believe that another instrument of injustice—war—is a remedy for these wrongs.

There can be no peace without law. And there can be no law if we were to invoke one code of international conduct for those who oppose us and another for our friends. (Emphasis added.)

The society of nations has been slow in developing means to apply this truth. But the passionate longing for peace on the part of all peoples of the earth compels us to speed our search for new and more effective instruments of justice.

The peace we seek and need means much more than mere absence of war. It means the acceptance of law and the fostering of justice in all the world.

To our principles guiding us in this quest we must stand fast. In so doing we can honor the hopes of all men for a world in which peace will truly and justly reign."


The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) was created to punish those who committed war crimes. In July 2005 many thousands of persons attended ceremonies marking the 10th anniversary of the massacre of Bosnian Muslims in Srebrenica. Close to 8,000 men and boys were killed by Bosnian Serb forces in 1995.

Britain’s Foreign Secretary Jack Straw apologized on behalf of the international community for failing to stop the atrocity. He stated, "For it is to the shame of the international community that this evil took place under our noses and we did nothing like enough. I bitterly regret this and I am deeply sorry for it."

To date, the ICTY has convicted three Bosnian Serbs, including Serb army chief-of-staff Gen. Rodosiav Krstic. Former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic is presently on trial and there are nine cases at the pre-trial stage. Still at large are Radovan Karadzic and Gen. Ratko Miadic.

In addition to the more than one thousand innocent Greek Cypriots killed by Turkey’s armed forces, the Turkish Cypriot militia killed five Americans of Greek Cypriot descent. The Turkish armed forces took them into captivity despite their American passports. They turned them over to the Turkish Cypriot militia, which was under the command of the Turkish Cypriot leader Rauf Denktash. Denktash has stated that the five Americans were killed by his Turkish Cypriot militia forces.

What has the U.S. done regarding Turkey’s war crimes and the killing of five Americans? Nothing!

During the 10th anniversary commemoration of the Srebrenica massacre, a film was shown of Serbs killing several men in cold blood. That footage received worldwide attention. If there had been a film of the Turkish Cypriot militia killing five Americans in cold blood I believe the U.S. would have had to react.

It is not too late for the U.S. to act regarding Turkey’s war crimes and the killing of five Americans by Denktash’s militia.

[insan]

It is interesting to note that advocates of the system of Proportional
Representation have quoted with approval the Cyprus Constitution. Thus
the late Earl Grey in an article in the Nineteenth Century, wrote as follows :
" At the end of 1882 it was decided to give Cyprus representative institutions.
A legislative council was created in which there were twelve members to be
elected by the people. But the census taken in 1881 revealed the fact that
one-quarter of the people were Mahomedan and three-quarters non-Mahome-
dan. Now, wishing to secure fair representation, what did the Government
do ? Did they divide the island into twelve districts each returning one
member ? No ; they knew that such a course would be grossly unfair to the
Mahomedans, w^ho, although they were one-quarter of the whole, would be,
of course, out-voted in every constituency, and practically disfranchized.
So the Government decided that three of the members should be elected by
the Mahomedan and nine by the non-Mahomedan inhabitants. . . . Now
it is difficult to understand why, if it is desirable to secure the general repre-
sentation of the people of Cyprus, it should not be equally desirable to obtain
the general representation of the people of the United Kingdom." It should
be gratifying to the Cypriot to And his Constitution cited by a prominent
Englishman as a model which the United Kingdom would do well to follow I



98 CYPRUS UNDER BRITISH RULE

We are able to substantiate by many proofs that during the
long period in which we had the opportunity we have constantly
endeavoured to support goodwill and justice, holding all
classes on an equal footing in our proceedings without distinc-
tion of creed or faith, and to shield and protect the sufferers
from wrong. While at the time of the change of the adminis-
tration of the island we knew we were losing a Government
of our own faith we willingly submitted to Her Britannic
Majesty's rule, and took refuge under the equitableness and
graciousness of Her Government, so well known to the whole
world, without paying any attention and without attaching
the least importance to the constant incitement and instiga-
tions of our Christian compatriots. We have never raised
complaints against the Government under any pretext what-
ever, but have always been the first to accept and comply with
all the orders and inhibitions, whether of a heavy or light
nature, made by the Government, and have zealously applied
ourselves to the speedy observance and carrying out of the
same ; and this we believe is a fact well known to the central
authorities. Nevertheless, whilst we expected to be publicly
rewarded for our zealous services in the past, and especially
in consideration of our official rights above referred to, it is
proposed that the Greek community whose thoughts and inten-
tions of oppressing and vexing us are made manifest under all
circumstances, and in every one of their acts, who have con-
stantly made all sorts of complaints (against the Government),
and whose endless cries of ' We want the Hellenic Govern-
ment for our rulers,' are still echoing from the heights of heaven,
should all at once be granted a privilege which they have never
possessed in the past, and which they can claim on no ground
of present grievance. Our Christian compatriots would have
hardly expected to acquire the proposed privilege even after
the lapse of a thousand years had, God forbid, the island been
ceded to the Hellenic Government. Such being the case, can
this indulgence be considered justifiable or approved by the
world ?

http://www.archive.org/stream/cyprusund ... c_djvu.txt

[Oracle]

Insan is in love with Gene R. ...

[insan]

On national grounds the case is stronger. The people
inhabiting the island when the Egyptians invaded and conquered
it, and when the Phoenicians colonized it, were, as has been
shown, in all probability of Javanian or Ionian origin, and
repeated immigrations from Greece took place before the
Christian era. The present Greek-speaking population is of
mixed blood, and contains in its veins the blood of all the
nations which from time to time conquered and colonized it.
But that the Greek element has proved by far the strongest
and most enduring is beyond doubt : the Greek tongue has
alone survived, and with it the Greek traditions have descended,
and have obliterated all others. The Greek-speaking inhabit-
ants have learnt through their language to venerate the
memory of ancient Greece and the glories of the Greek age,
and to regard themselves as the lineal descendants of the race
of heroes, philosophers and sculptors whose matchless con-
tribution to modern civilization is recognized by the whole
world.

http://www.archive.org/stream/cyprusund ... c_djvu.txt