Cyprus-Forum.com

[magikthrill]

wow thats a lot of research erol!

I do believe that both sides have been waging a propaganda war aginst each other for as long as there has been two sides.

I think that both sides 'offical' versions of history are little more than propaganda.

i think from these two quotes we both understand that the point to this article is useless.

both sides as you correctly put are fed with myths so whats the point in singling out one case?

[erolz]

wow thats a lot of research erol!

I do believe that both sides have been waging a propaganda war aginst each other for as long as there has been two sides.

I think that both sides 'offical' versions of history are little more than propaganda.

i think from these two quotes we both understand that the point to this article is useless.

both sides as you correctly put are fed with myths so whats the point in singling out one case?

Actually I disagree. I think the writer of the article is trying to destroy the offical myths of his community and to me this is a worthwhile and much needed effort (on both sides - just to be clear).

Both sides need to accept and reverse their own propaganda and the effects of it. This article seems to be an attempt to do that on the part of GC and I welcome and comended it (and author) for this effort.

PS I also think that it is quite indicative of Main_Sources mindset that he immediately sought to dismiss the entire article with some 'myth making' of his own Again - pot, kettle speings to mind.

[magikthrill]

Actually I disagree. I think the writer of the article is trying to destroy the offical myths of his community and to me this is a worthwhile and much needed effort (on both sides - just to be clear).

Both sides need to accept and reverse their own propaganda and the effects of it. This article seems to be an attempt to do that on the part of GC and I welcome and comended it (and author) for this effort.

first of all id like to congratulate you. after 5 pages of thread you finally referenced the article

anyway im not talking about the articles content but the fact that it was posted here.

i can go ahead on write my own article on the crap posted on the trncgov.com which is current and not 40 years ago but whats the point?

[erolz]

anyway im not talking about the articles content but the fact that it was posted here.

OK. I see the disitinction

i can go ahead on write my own article on the crap posted on the trncgov.com which is current and not 40 years ago but whats the point?

Would there be any point in ME writing such an article and posting it here or for YOU to write one about the ROC PIO site and posting it here? Hopely you can see the difference in this approach to your suggested one?

[magikthrill]

Would there be any point in ME writing such an article and posting it here or for YOU to write one about the ROC PIO site and posting it here? Hopely you can see the difference in this approach to your suggested one?

you confused me

anyway what im trying to say is that there is no point in discussing such conctent alone when discussing the issue.

it would be different if the article or the poster decided to put up an article discussin ghow the RoC continues to use propaganda today which is something that prevents a solution.

Or posting an incident (As the one in the article) relating to something recent or generally something that can be discussed in reaching a solution.

i think we all know who are the members on this forum that dont recognize propaganda efforts by his/her own side so theres really not point in posting stuff just to make them confess - unless they blatantly say something supid and you feel the urget to disprove them.

am i making sense here? i feel like ive been digressing

[erolz]

you confused me

What I am suggesting is that would be little value in me writting an article that looks at and exposes propaganda given out by the RoC and such an attempt could / would itself be a form of propaganda. However if I were to do that (as a TC) for TRNC based propaganda I think the value would be real. IE seeking to dispell the propaganda of the other side is one thing. Seeking to dispell the propaganda of your own side is another.

it would be different if the article or the poster decided to put up an article discussin ghow the RoC continues to use propaganda today which is something that prevents a solution.

Or posting an incident (As the one in the article) relating to something recent or generally something that can be discussed in reaching a solution.

Again I think this is exactly the point of the article is it not? Not that 'propaganda' was used by the RoC in the past, but that when such evidence of that historical propaganda comes to light TODAY and it indicates that people like TP have questions to answer concerning it, there is a general 'lack of interest or acceptance' and that undermines efforts TODAY to solve the cyprus problem? At least that to me seems the point the author is trying to make.

i think we all know who are the members on this forum that dont recognize propaganda efforts by his/her own side so theres really not point in posting stuff just to make them confess - unless they blatantly say something supid and you feel the urget to disprove them.

I probably should have ignored the ccusations that I am biased and unable to accept that my side uses propaganda, from someone who imho shows much greater and consistent bias and refusla to aknowldege their own sides propagnda. However sometimes I feel I have to challenge such attacks against me and the hypocrasy of those making them. I am only human (honest).

[magikthrill]

What I am suggesting is that would be little value in me writting an article that looks at and exposes propaganda given out by the RoC and such an attempt could / would itself be a form of propaganda. However if I were to do that (as a TC) for TRNC based propaganda I think the value would be real. IE seeking to dispell the propaganda of the other side is one thing. Seeking to dispell the propaganda of your own side is another.

it would be different if the article or the poster decided to put up an article discussin ghow the RoC continues to use propaganda today which is something that prevents a solution.

yes i agree.

Again I think this is exactly the point of the article is it not? Not that 'propaganda' was used by the RoC in the past, but that when such evidence of that historical propaganda comes to light TODAY and it indicates that people like TP have questions to answer concerning it, there is a general 'lack of interest or acceptance' and that undermines efforts TODAY to solve the cyprus problem? At least that to me seems the point the author is trying to make.

i see what you mean. what i got out of the article is just "bla bla bla - t pap is a war criminal- bla bla bla - akritas plan - bla bla bla"

I probably should have ignored the ccusations that I am biased and unable to accept that my side uses propaganda, from someone who imho shows much greater and consistent bias and refusla to aknowldege their own sides propagnda. However sometimes I feel I have to challenge such attacks against me and the hypocrasy of those making them. I am only human (honest).

as we all are and as we all do.

[gabaston]

brother

i think you're wrong there mate, it sticks allright.
somewhere someone somehow noted it and its another black mark against his name.

I think it has been submitted to the British Parliament Select Committee for foreign affairs as written evidence.

http://www.parliament.the-stationery-of ... 13we23.htm

[suetoniuspaulinus]

brother

i think you're wrong there mate, it sticks allright.
somewhere someone somehow noted it and its another black mark against his name.

I think it has been submitted to the British Parliament Select Committee for foreign affairs as written evidence.

http://www.parliament.the-stationery-of ... 13we23.htm

Mr Gabaston

Thanks for this link

[brother]

Thanks for the link Gabaston