Cyprus-Forum.com

[CBBB]

By Nicos Rolandis

I RECALL it was May 1978, three months after I had taken over as Minister of Foreign Affairs. I was in New York with President Spyros Kyprianou to attend the First UN Special Session on Disarmament.

During my stay there, I addressed a gathering of overseas Greeks and Cypriots and I thanked them, inter alia, for the solidarity of the Greek Americans with Cyprus and her cause. When my speech was over, the president of one of the participating associations approached me and discreetly suggested that Greeks in the US would rather be called “Americans of Greek origin” than “Greek Americans”. They were first and foremost Americans and their origin followed.

When I went back to the hotel, I pondered over what was suggested to me. I wondered how many Cypriots feel they are Cypriots first, and then Greeks or Turks. My memory flew back to the hard years we went through in the 1960s, when a negligible number of citizens only believed in their country and her national symbols… Years during which Greeks and Turks considered Cyprus as a “transit station” to union with Greece (Enosis) for the Greeks and to partition (Taksim) or total Turkish occupation for the Turks.

“I do solemnly affirm faith to, and respect for, the Constitution and the laws made thereunder, the preservation of the independence and the territorial integrity of the Republic of Cyprus”. This is the oath taken by the leaders: this is the oath of all Cypriots – Greeks and Turks.

The President of the Republic, however, in December 1963 attempted to redraft and amend the Constitution, to which he had pledged his allegiance. Furthermore the House of Representatives (consisting of Greek Cypriots only at the time) voted unanimously on June 27, 1967 that “it will not defer the struggle, presently carried out with the solidarity of all Greeks, until the union, without any intermediary stations, of the whole unified Cyprus with motherland Greece is implemented” (Minutes of the House of Representatives 1966-1967, page 1274).

On the other side of the fence, the Turkish Cypriots, through extremist and unlawful organisations ( in parallel to the Greek Cypriot ones), were trying to overturn the constitutional order and achieve partition.

We really had beautiful people in Cyprus in those years, fully dedicated to their motherland! A motherland in which they never believed – they employed all possible methods to exterminate her… A feat they eventually achieved.

The mentality of many people remains unaltered since then. As I wrote in the past, the more we suffer the less we learn in this country.

Each community has built its own cause through its own separate angle. It firmly believes that justice and principles are on its own side. And each one has erected its own ideological castle along the following lines:

Greek Cypriot case:

THEY fought in 1955-59 for union with Greece, a venerable and sacred right. In 1960, they were compelled to veer to independence, which however was not just and balanced. So, they endeavoured to make the necessary corrections in 1963, keeping alive, in parallel, their irrepressible desire for union with Greece. In the meantime the Turkish Cypriots kept undermining the Cyprus Republic and they revolted in 1963. Later on, the treacherous junta came to power in Greece. It destabilised Makarios and together with EOKA B carried out the coup in 1974. Turkey invaded and brought havoc to Cyprus, to this day occupying 37 per cent of the territory of the Republic. There are currently around 1,500 Greek Cypriot missing persons. The various Plans of the United Nations cannot be accepted because they do not safeguard in a just way the rights of the Greek Cypriots. The Turkish Cypriots and Turkey are to blame for whatever goes wrong in Cyprus.

Turkish Cypriot case:

THE Greek Cypriots fought in 1955-59 for union with Greece, ignoring the rights of the Turkish Cypriots. Eventually the Republic of Cyprus was established, which the Greek Cypriots incessantly undermined. In 1963, Makarios tried to destroy the constitutional order. In the 1960s the Turkish Cypriots were forced to live in enclaves and the Greek Cypriots were aiming at their annihilation. In 1974 the Greek Cypriots and the Greek Junta tried to achieve union with Greece through the coup d’?tat. Turkey intervened to save the Turkish Cypriots but still many of them perished and 500 are missing. Because of the above, the Turkish Cypriots believe that the two communities must live apart under a very loose federation. The Greek Cypriots and Greece are to blame for whatever goes wrong in Cyprus.

In general terms the international community kept a distance from both communities. It recognised on the one hand the Republic of Cyprus under the leadership of the Greek Cypriots. On the other hand, through its stance and resolutions, it supported pragmatic positions which are not palatable to many Cypriots.

When it comes to justice, what are really the criteria that apply in this world? A world where you have the Gaza Strip, Darfour and the 40,000 children who die of hunger every day on the one hand and the mega-yachts and the provocative abundance, waste and luxury on the other.

Where has justice prevailed in real terms, so that Cyprus can seek to have it as well? And what constitutes justice in this unjust world?

It is in this unstable atmosphere that the talks are carried out in Cyprus. And although I am not conversant with all details, I would make some preliminary remarks on what is under negotiation:

1. I do not believe that the Greek Cypriot position of electing the President and the Vice President on a single list by the whole electorate is correct and sustainable. In such a case the Greek Cypriots will determine who the Turkish Cypriot President/ Vice President will be, because they constitute the majority of the electorate. Such a Greek Cypriot privilege did not exist even in the 1960 constitution.

2. The Turkish Cypriot side cannot insist that Turkey should have the right to a military intervention in Cyprus, which is a member of the European Union and to which Turkey aspires to accede. Besides, such a “right” is prohibited by the United Nations Charter and by European laws and regulations. Under such an arrangement shall we not legalise the aggression of one state against another?

3. As far as the question of property rights are concerned, I believe that neither the absolute positions of Talat nor those of Christofias will lead anywhere. There are many resolutions of the United Nations which propose a methodology on this issue. But most importantly we have the 1977 Makarios–Denktash Agreement, which provides that matters of principle, like “the right to property are open for discussion, taking into consideration the fundamental basis of a bicommunal federal system and certain practical difficulties which may arise for the Turkish Cypriot Community”. This Agreement, if there is good faith, may constitute the golden mean.

Aeschylus said that “when one listens to one of two sides, he learns only half the truth”. Christofias and Talat must listen carefully to each other and seek justice after taking into account the arguments, the mistakes, the omissions and the sins of all Cypriots. Otherwise, Cyprus will remain divided into two parts, which does not serve the interests of either the Greek or the Turkish Cypriots.


n Nicos Rolandis was Cyprus’ Foreign Minister from 1978-1983 and the Minister of Commerce, Industry & Tourism from 1998-2003

Copyright © Cyprus Mail 2009

http://www.cyprus-mail.com/news/main.ph ... 5&cat_id=1

[Bananiot]

What took you so long to post this CBBB?

So we craved for enosis right up to 1967 and then, I supposed, we just stopped loving the Greeks.

[Kifeas]

I always had the opinion that this man, Rolandis, is the biggest idiotic asshole this land has ever produced, and he never fails to disprove or disappoint me.

When it comes to justice, what are really the criteria that apply in this world? A world where you have the Gaza Strip, Darfour and the 40,000 children who die of hunger every day on the one hand and the mega-yachts and the provocative abundance, waste and luxury on the other.

Where has justice prevailed in real terms, so that Cyprus can seek to have it as well? And what constitutes justice in this unjust world?

Reading this line from this idiot, one could see that he understands where justice lies, but at the same time he is calling on the Greek Cypriots to stop seeking for it and basically …surrender, because in his words “where has justice prevailed in real terms(?)” Well, Mr. “piss off,” we choose to seek for fairness and justice, because that is the essence of living, and our criteria is not whether in the end we will find it or not, but because this is what is ethically appropriate to do, not just in our own old and long stretched culture, civilization and historical consciousness, but also in every other culture and civilization on this planet. If every man and every people in the history of this planet did not strive for fairness and justice, human kind would not have evolved in the status we are today, but would still be living as illiterate slaves under monarchs and tyrants. There is no place in Greek civilization and culture (the cornerstone of western civilization,) for insulting words, claims and suggestions such as yours!

I do not believe that the Greek Cypriot position of electing the President and the Vice President on a single list by the whole electorate is correct and sustainable. In such a case the Greek Cypriots will determine who the Turkish Cypriot President/ Vice President will be, because they constitute the majority of the electorate. Such a Greek Cypriot privilege did not exist even in the 1960 constitution.

First of all, the GC side has not proposed anything like the one you describe above, but instead an election of rotating president /vice president directly by the people, with separate GC & TC community or state based lists and a weighted TC vote to minimize or eliminate what you described as the outcome. Therefore, what you are presenting here is a non issue! Furthermore, a very basic element of democracy calls for anyone posing to become a leader of a country, to have been elected by all people, and each citizen to have had an opportunity to vote for or against anyone that will undertake such a role. To have somebody becoming a leader of the whole country, even for one hour such as in the case of rotating presidency, without him been possibly chosen by all the citizens, but only by one community alone, is not a characteristic of democracy in a country, and this is where the 1960 arrangement failed as well. This will direct such a leader(s) to maintain commitment or alliance with only one community, i.e. the one from which s/he was elected, and will not be able to feel and act as the leader of the whole country and its people, nor the people of the community which did not participate in his election will feel committed to his leadership and decisions. Such a thing will be a very dangerous ingredient and will make such an arrangement fail or to always be suspect. I wonder why it is so difficult for Rolandis, if not due to his old and rusted brains, to understand such a very basic fact of life and politics.

As far as the question of property rights are concerned, I believe that neither the absolute positions of Talat nor those of Christofias will lead anywhere. There are many resolutions of the United Nations which propose a methodology on this issue. But most importantly we have the 1977 Makarios–Denktash Agreement, which provides that matters of principle, like “the right to property are open for discussion, taking into consideration the fundamental basis of a bicommunal federal system and certain practical difficulties which may arise for the Turkish Cypriot Community”. This Agreement, if there is good faith, may constitute the golden mean.

Why don’t you, Mr. idiot of the idiots, explain to us what is in Mr. Christofia's positions that contradicts with any of the past agreements and /or resolutions on the way the property issue is to be resolved? As far as I know, there is absolutely no contradiction! Come on, do tell us, if not you, your agents in this forum at least! Where are you, Bananiot?

[Bananiot]

Here I am Kifeas and the rest of the little fascists of the forum who can not stomach an opinion that differs to yours. This is the trade mark of all devils who confuse the Greek civilisation (cornerstone of western civilisation) with a crude, scatological ideology that the classical Greeks had nothing to do with.

I have never met Nikos Rolandis in person but I do pay a lot of attention to what he says. Therefore, I note that, when he writes:

When it comes to justice, what are really the criteria that apply in this world? A world where you have the Gaza Strip, Darfour and the 40,000 children who die of hunger every day on the one hand and the mega-yachts and the provocative abundance, waste and luxury on the other.

Where has justice prevailed in real terms, so that Cyprus can seek to have it as well? And what constitutes justice in this unjust world?

It is in this unstable atmosphere that the talks are carried out in Cyprus. And although I am not conversant with all details, I would make some preliminary remarks on what is under negotiation:

Kifeas chose to ignore the last two paragraphs in order to create a daemon and fight it. Rolandis describes a pragmatic phenomenon when he says that the world we are living in is an unjust one and at the same time it is also unstable and likely to change, If I may add. Before 1974 the world was unjust for the Turkish Cypriots living in enclaves but no Kifeas at the time thought or concerned hiself in any way with this injustice. In fact, the likes of Kifeas that now suddenly have become prudent and justice-seeking, sought to keep the Turkish Cypriots in the enclaves until the best of them emigrated for ever and the rest gave in and declared their wish to exist as a sorry minority in a state that the two communities created as equal partners. Rolandis is spot on here, whether we like it or not and once again Kifeas reacts violently to the light of the truth that blinds him.

Regarding the issue of rotating presidency, this was the issue of another discussion in this forum where Kifeas duly displayed his immaculate adherence to the principle of Greek civilisation. Suffice to say that it is a fallacy to expect the Turkish Cypriots to agree that the Greek Cypriots would have a deciding vote in the election of the Turkish Cypriot President of the new Cyprus.

The property issue is now debated at the talks. I am not aware of what Christofias has proposed but the Makarios-Denktash agreement of 1977 leaves many gray areas which have become even more obscure in the 32 years that have elapsed.

[halil]

I like the writers who has heart to write the truth..... truth of the Cyprus problem ......

here is the another one for u .

Living in the Cyprus hell!
13.02.2009

Niyazi Kizilyurek

I participated in one of the TV programmes on northern Cyprus this week. The topic was the Ergenekon case, Turkey and Cyprus. This is a fine topic to turn the dark pages of recent history and ask questions to stimulate debate. We are talking about topics such as: the leftist labourers killed following the 1st May events in 1958, journalists killed in 1962 and the ‘deep’ intervention conducted within Turkish Cypriot political life and so on. Party buildings, cars and houses shot at or bombed after 1974 - the murder of Kutlu Adali. Those responsible for these violent acts have never been revealed; as a matter of fact a proper inquiry was not even conducted. In short we are talking about topics that everyone knows about, but are fearful of questioning due to the ‘ban of remembering’.

I got into my car after the programme and took off to attend another TV programme in southern Cyprus to take part in another debate. As I was randomly searching for something to listen to on the car radio I came across a programme where an angry spectator was complaining about the programme. The man was saying that such programmes made him “uneasy” adding that such talk meant “treason” and asking the producer of the programme if such “treason was supposed to have consequences or not.” The radio programme producer was saying “there should be consequences”. The producer, who was an experienced journalist, had no compassion for the murdered journalists nor did he have any worry of seeking one’s rights nor did he have an intension of confronting the past nor did he have the intention to make an ordinary statement that would say “everyone should be entitled to express their opinion in democracies.” He preferred to say “treason should have consequences”.

Only Turkish barbarism

He dragged down the infant Turkish Cypriot Democracy that hardly had its head above water level. Think about it, a journalist of experience in the country was ignorant and blind enough without conscience to say that ‘traitors’ should be punished. The evening of the same day I attended the ‘Atilla Olgac’ panel held at the RIK (CyBC) TV channel. There were 5 people on the panel who laid everything about the Atilla Olgac case on the table and all shared their opinions that he was to be punished if he actually committed a ‘war crime’. I began a sentence saying: “This is not the end of the issue, this incident should be a means to confront the past.” That was when everyone looked at me in surprise. Apparently I was changing the subject as we were talking about ‘Turkish Barbarism’. I began to say: “Do not be so stiff, there were many murders in the country and no one was taken to trial for them,” when suddenly I realised that they had no clue of the torturous events and murders! To them there was … no Dohni, no Murataga, and no Sanadallar! There was only ‘Turkish Barbarism’. I said, “There is no such thing as Turkish Barbarism though there are barbaric acts. The names of those responsible could be Atilla or Nikoli. If we are condemning one barbaric act we need to condemn all those responsible of similar acts.” There was not a single sound! I continued to say: “A Greek Cypriot was called in to one of the shows I attended just yesterday where he talked about the Turkish Cypriot shepherd who was killed for no reason.” The answer I got was: “He was probably making it up.”

Ban on remembering

Once the programme was over one of the panellists came to me and said: “I know those responsible of the Dohni massacre.” I went crazy and said: “Are you saying it now so that no-one hears of it?” A few days later Rolandos Katsaounis calls in to another show saying that he had gone through a lot for saying that he had killed 32 Turkish Cypriots for no reason in Famagusta. The North of the island got hold of what Katsaounis said and the South of the island cannot let go of Atilla Olgac. This is the kind of place Cyprus is. There are two small communities with self induced “bans on remembering” that created the “heavy injury industry,” they keep working to get damned in their monopoly. Politicians, media bosses, and academics in short all social elites are basing their existence on this ‘industry’, producing and reproducing. There seems to be no sign of the questioning and critical way of thinking at all. As in all areas where questioning minds are asleep, monsters are wondering in Cyprus! Minds and hearts have been limited with the boarders of ethnic communities, the facts of the ‘other’ are only important for ‘us’ as long as they provide us with propaganda material. This is our sole duty. To count the facts and rights of the ‘other’ in vain, due to an unspoken rule; although hiding behind the ‘other’, that we do not respect at all, when it is for our benefit! This will ensure that we continue to be the ‘injured’ party. Could it be possible otherwise to create the Cypriot Hell?

[halil]

here is the another writer who has also heart .

Loucas Charalambous .

How truly mature society behaves.

The Unprecendented public city given to the televised admission of Turkish Actor Attila Olgaç and the hysterical reaction this proveked was yet another illustration of our sociaty's lack of measure and perspective.
I am vonvinced that the Turkish actor,who claimed he had shot death 10 Greek Cypriots during the 1974 invasion,was a foolish fibber intent on showing off on television and in the company of 2 attractive female presenters.The ludicrous claim that the first prisoner he shot had spat in his face was indicative of Olgac's stupidy.The person who will spit in the face of a soldier pointing a gun to his head has not been born yet.Things like these happen only in cowbay films, yet there was no shortage of Greek Cypriots prepared to believe a fool.We did not need Olgac's fairytail to confirm the fact that prisoners had been executed by the Turks in 1974.
There was one aspect of the story that was quite suprising the way the revelations were received in Turkey.The public reaction of media and the investigations ordered both by an Attomey-general and the Turkish General staff suggested things are changing in Turkey. To understand the significance of this reaction we should perhaps ask ourselves the question:
If Olgac was not a Turk but a Greek , how many Greek journalist ,how many Greek newspapers and how many military men would have reacted in this way ?
Would they not have pilloried him for unpatriotic behaviour that exposed our side?Nobody would have the guts to condemn his actiones,as journalists and media commentators had done in Turkey.No newspaper in Cyprus or Greece would have written what Turkey's Hurriyet wrote about Olgac.

But did we not commit crimes in 1963-64 perid and in 1974 , against unarmed and defenceless Turkish Cypriots? sadly we only dealt with half of the truth the atrocities committed by the other side and pretended that we did not see our own .

This practice goes back a long way.as regards the war in Asia minor in 1922 , all that our journalists write about is death and destruction caused in Smyrna by Turkish army.The similar crimes commited previously by the advancing Greek army which set fire to entire villages,killing innocent civilianss are never ,ever mentioned ,by our writers.Yet these crimes were recorded at the time by independent ,international investigation ,which put Greece in the dock and shamed the country internationally.
These minor details are never taught to secondary school students by teachers in the OELMEK union ,which has recently taken the role of defender of Greek national history.

''A mature society would not hesisate to look at his past with a critical eye '' wrote the rector of the university of Cyprus,Stavros Zenios last week.I could not agree with him more , but the only problem is that our society is still light years away from maturity.

[Kifeas]

Here I am Kifeas and the rest of the little fascists of the forum who can not stomach an opinion that differs to yours. This is the trade mark of all devils who confuse the Greek civilisation (cornerstone of western civilisation) with a crude, scatological ideology that the classical Greeks had nothing to do with.

I have never met Nikos Rolandis in person but I do pay a lot of attention to what he says. Therefore, I note that, when he writes:

When it comes to justice, what are really the criteria that apply in this world? A world where you have the Gaza Strip, Darfour and the 40,000 children who die of hunger every day on the one hand and the mega-yachts and the provocative abundance, waste and luxury on the other.

Where has justice prevailed in real terms, so that Cyprus can seek to have it as well? And what constitutes justice in this unjust world?

It is in this unstable atmosphere that the talks are carried out in Cyprus. And although I am not conversant with all details, I would make some preliminary remarks on what is under negotiation:

Kifeas chose to ignore the last two paragraphs in order to create a daemon and fight it. Rolandis describes a pragmatic phenomenon when he says that the world we are living in is an unjust one and at the same time it is also unstable and likely to change, If I may add. Before 1974 the world was unjust for the Turkish Cypriots living in enclaves but no Kifeas at the time thought or concerned hiself in any way with this injustice. In fact, the likes of Kifeas that now suddenly have become prudent and justice-seeking, sought to keep the Turkish Cypriots in the enclaves until the best of them emigrated for ever and the rest gave in and declared their wish to exist as a sorry minority in a state that the two communities created as equal partners. Rolandis is spot on here, whether we like it or not and once again Kifeas reacts violently to the light of the truth that blinds him.

Regarding the issue of rotating presidency, this was the issue of another discussion in this forum where Kifeas duly displayed his immaculate adherence to the principle of Greek civilisation. Suffice to say that it is a fallacy to expect the Turkish Cypriots to agree that the Greek Cypriots would have a deciding vote in the election of the Turkish Cypriot President of the new Cyprus.

The property issue is now debated at the talks. I am not aware of what Christofias has proposed but the Makarios-Denktash agreement of 1977 leaves many gray areas which have become even more obscure in the 32 years that have elapsed.

You are the last person (and in fact very few are able) to give me a lesson on what the Greek Civilization constitutes, and yes, the fact that is regarded as the cornerstone of western civilization is not mine or any other Greek's "invention," but an axiom shared diachronically by the most notable scholars along and across the globe. Direct elsewhere your silly claims about me confusing it with any scatological or otherwise ideologies!

I chose to ignore no paragraphs! In fact, if I remember correctly, the paragraphs on which I commented are the last ones, where Rolandis makes his silly recommendations.

You say that we discussed the issue of president elections elsewhere, and this is correct. However, you chose to distort what I said, by hiding the fact that what I proposed allows the TCs to also have a deciding saying on who the GC (co-)president of the federal government /state will be. Furthermore, you chose to mix-up the president /deputy president duo of the federal state, with the leaders of the two communities, when in fact they might as well be two entirely different people. Have anyone of you imagined the president of the US been elected by a number of states alone, and the vice president been elected by a number of other, different states, on a separate election? It would have been absurd and completely unacceptable by the people of the country as a whole, more so when the vice president (co-president to be more accurate) will deputize the president for a certain period of time. Bananiot chooses to deliberately miss the obvious and valid point I make, simply because Talat, Turkey and the TCs do not accept it, only because they want to impose a rotating co-president on the GCs that will be elected with the deciding vote of the Turkish settlers, and will always be the choice of Ankara, without the GCs having the power to influence who will be their president also. Of course, such a dangerous anomaly will never be accepted by the GCs, for they are not so stupid like Rolandis and "Loucoudin" Charalambous. Even the Annan plan did not allow for such an occurrence, since every member of the presidential council that would have been appointed by the senate and the parliament, would have been required to receive a minimum of 2/5 from each of the two communities, regardless of the fact that such a 6 member rotating presidential council would have been another anomaly by itself, since we would have had a different president every 9 months.

Furthermore, Bananiot and his above two idiot "friends," fail to realize and understand the horizontal dynamics in bringing the ordinary people of the two communities together, that will emerge as a result of them having to participate and run together the campaigns of their chosen duo of candidates, across the two communities and federative states; just like the US presidential election campaign does for the US, across the states and among the people of the country as a whole.

[Bananiot]

Kifeas

You are the last person (and in fact very few are able) to give me a lesson on what the Greek Civilization constitutes, and yes, the fact that is regarded as the cornerstone of western civilization is not mine or any other Greek's "invention," but an axiom shared diachronically by the most notable scholars along and across the globe. Direct elsewhere your silly claims about me confusing it with any scatological or otherwise ideologies!

I chose to ignore no paragraphs! In fact, if I remember correctly, the paragraphs on which I commented are the last ones, where Rolandis makes his silly recommendations.

You say that we discussed the issue of president elections elsewhere, and this is correct. However, you chose to distort what I said, by hiding the fact that what I proposed allows the TCs to also have a deciding saying on who the GC (co-)president of the federal government /state will be. Furthermore, you chose to mix-up the president /deputy president duo of the federal state, with the leaders of the two communities, when in fact they might as well be two entirely different people. Have anyone of you imagined the president of the US been elected by a number of states alone, and the vice president been elected by a number of other, different states, on a separate election? It would have been absurd and completely unacceptable by the people of the country as a whole, more so when the vice president (co-president to be more accurate) will deputize the president for a certain period of time. Bananiot chooses to deliberately miss the obvious and valid point I make, simply because Talat, Turkey and the TCs do not accept it, only because they want to impose a rotating co-president on the GCs that will be elected with the deciding vote of the Turkish settlers, and will always be the choice of Ankara, without the GCs having the power to influence who will be their president also. Of course, such a dangerous anomaly will never be accepted by the GCs, for they are not so stupid like Rolandis and "Loucoudin" Charalambous. Even the Annan plan did not allow for such an occurrence, since every member of the presidential council that would have been appointed by the senate and the parliament, would have been required to receive a minimum of 2/5 from each of the two communities, regardless of the fact that such a 6 member rotating presidential council would have been another anomaly by itself, since we would have had a different president every 9 months.

Furthermore, Bananiot and his above two idiot "friends," fail to realize and understand the horizontal dynamics in bringing the ordinary people of the two communities together, that will emerge as a result of them having to participate and run together the campaigns of their chosen duo of candidates, across the two communities and federative states; just like the US presidential election campaign does for the US, across the states and among the people of the country as a whole.

Kifeas, a foul mouth person like youself cannot pretend to be a lover of the ancient Greek civilisation. Also, on numerous occasions you have exhibited a severe inability to comprehend the classics and perhaps this explains your forum behaviour. In short you have nothing in common with Greek civilisation. That was what I wrote previously which you misinterpreted as an objection on my behalf of the Greek civilisation being the cornerstone of the western world.

Your reference to the USA and the "horizontal dynamics" (sic) only illustrates your complete and utter refusal to see the realities that exist in Cyprus today, 46 years after the intercommunal strife started and 35 years after the Turkish invasion. This can only be explained by your total inability to view issues in a political manner. In a nutshell, what you are suggesting is palatable only to the cloud climbers in our side. It cannot be achieved and if we decide to go for the desirable again, god save us.However, if you can come up with some ideas as to how we can go about doing it, I am prepared to listen to you.

[Oracle]

If Bananiot thinks he has anything in common with anyone from the Hellenic world, it is with the real Greek traitor Ephialtes who betrayed King Leonidas at Thermopylae ...

[insan]

If Bananiot thinks he has anything in common with anyone from the Hellenic world, it is with the real Greek traitor Ephialtes who betrayed King Leonidas at Thermopylae ...

Oracle the coward Turk hater, stop accusing Bananiot for treason and if u have credible evidences regarding his traitorism; go bring a lawsuit abt him, eh?