eracles wrote:http://naa12.naa.gov.au/scripts/imagine.asp?B=588483&I=1&SE=1
The full folder is here - seems impossible to link to particular pages but i think there was a 2nd page to that document.
Bleedin' 'ell. There's 286 pages!!
eracles wrote:http://naa12.naa.gov.au/scripts/imagine.asp?B=588483&I=1&SE=1
The full folder is here - seems impossible to link to particular pages but i think there was a 2nd page to that document.
insan wrote:Tim Drayton wrote:This is powerful support for one of Brendan O'Malley and Ian Craig's main hypotheses in "The Cyprus Conspiracy".
It is not Tim. I recommend u to read 400 pages of CIA report that reveals the truth about why Britain did not want to join Turkey for an bilateral intervention. Though in above report it can also be seen in the first paragraph. Brits having the bitter experince of guerilla warfare with EOKA, were predicting a little chance of success, waging a guerilla warfare against EOKA-B. On the other hand US did not wish to internationalize the issue. There was nothing pre-planned. Everything developed under the then circumstances.
Please read all the details from CIA report:
http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.php?t=22700
Tim Drayton wrote:insan wrote:Tim Drayton wrote:This is powerful support for one of Brendan O'Malley and Ian Craig's main hypotheses in "The Cyprus Conspiracy".
It is not Tim. I recommend u to read 400 pages of CIA report that reveals the truth about why Britain did not want to join Turkey for an bilateral intervention. Though in above report it can also be seen in the first paragraph. Brits having the bitter experince of guerilla warfare with EOKA, were predicting a little chance of success, waging a guerilla warfare against EOKA-B. On the other hand US did not wish to internationalize the issue. There was nothing pre-planned. Everything developed under the then circumstances.
Please read all the details from CIA report:
http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.php?t=22700
I will try to find time to read this CIA report, but even at first glance I fail to undertsand how a report dated February 21, 1973 can provide any clear evidence about events that took place more than a year later.
Tim Drayton wrote:insan wrote:Tim Drayton wrote:This is powerful support for one of Brendan O'Malley and Ian Craig's main hypotheses in "The Cyprus Conspiracy".
It is not Tim. I recommend u to read 400 pages of CIA report that reveals the truth about why Britain did not want to join Turkey for an bilateral intervention. Though in above report it can also be seen in the first paragraph. Brits having the bitter experince of guerilla warfare with EOKA, were predicting a little chance of success, waging a guerilla warfare against EOKA-B. On the other hand US did not wish to internationalize the issue. There was nothing pre-planned. Everything developed under the then circumstances.
Please read all the details from CIA report:
http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.php?t=22700
I will try to find time to read this CIA report, but even at first glance I fail to undertsand how a report dated February 21, 1973 can provide any clear evidence about events that took place more than a year later.
insan wrote:Tim Drayton wrote:insan wrote:Tim Drayton wrote:This is powerful support for one of Brendan O'Malley and Ian Craig's main hypotheses in "The Cyprus Conspiracy".
It is not Tim. I recommend u to read 400 pages of CIA report that reveals the truth about why Britain did not want to join Turkey for an bilateral intervention. Though in above report it can also be seen in the first paragraph. Brits having the bitter experince of guerilla warfare with EOKA, were predicting a little chance of success, waging a guerilla warfare against EOKA-B. On the other hand US did not wish to internationalize the issue. There was nothing pre-planned. Everything developed under the then circumstances.
Please read all the details from CIA report:
http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.php?t=22700
I will try to find time to read this CIA report, but even at first glance I fail to undertsand how a report dated February 21, 1973 can provide any clear evidence about events that took place more than a year later.
The report covers the years 1973-1976. Scroll down Tim.
insan wrote:Not only Turkey but USSR was unhappy at the c'oup too and concerned abt it's implications for the regime, particularly for Soviet interests. The USSR would have difficulties in supporting military action by Turkey.
http://naa16.naa.gov.au/rs_images/ShowI ... 83&S=8&T=R
Oracle wrote:Tim Drayton wrote:insan wrote:Tim Drayton wrote:This is powerful support for one of Brendan O'Malley and Ian Craig's main hypotheses in "The Cyprus Conspiracy".
It is not Tim. I recommend u to read 400 pages of CIA report that reveals the truth about why Britain did not want to join Turkey for an bilateral intervention. Though in above report it can also be seen in the first paragraph. Brits having the bitter experince of guerilla warfare with EOKA, were predicting a little chance of success, waging a guerilla warfare against EOKA-B. On the other hand US did not wish to internationalize the issue. There was nothing pre-planned. Everything developed under the then circumstances.
Please read all the details from CIA report:
http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.php?t=22700
I will try to find time to read this CIA report, but even at first glance I fail to undertsand how a report dated February 21, 1973 can provide any clear evidence about events that took place more than a year later.
You have to make allowances for insan ... he has been experimenting with psychedelic drugs for the best part of 3 decades ....
YFred wrote:insan wrote:Not only Turkey but USSR was unhappy at the c'oup too and concerned abt it's implications for the regime, particularly for Soviet interests. The USSR would have difficulties in supporting military action by Turkey.
http://naa16.naa.gov.au/rs_images/ShowI ... 83&S=8&T=R
Don't show this document to our friend Bafities and the rest of the Australian greeks, they will get very upset that all Australian soldiers were safely in the British bases instead of doing fighting.
insan wrote:YFred wrote:insan wrote:Not only Turkey but USSR was unhappy at the c'oup too and concerned abt it's implications for the regime, particularly for Soviet interests. The USSR would have difficulties in supporting military action by Turkey.
http://naa16.naa.gov.au/rs_images/ShowI ... 83&S=8&T=R
Don't show this document to our friend Bafities and the rest of the Australian greeks, they will get very upset that all Australian soldiers were safely in the British bases instead of doing fighting.
Archbishop Seraphim called on Greeks "TO SETTLE THEIR FINAL ACCOUNT WITH TURKS" YFfred, do u remember any of our Head Imams called on Turks to do something to Greeks? Lemme check the report.
http://naa16.naa.gov.au/rs_images/ShowI ... 83&S=9&T=R
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests