Tim Drayton wrote:Thanks for posting this. I have just watched all eleven clips. I have always believed that this man would have an interesting story to tell if he was permitted to tell it. Does anybody know if any bookshop in Cyprus has his book in stock?
What's happened and all of a sudden "they" permitted him to tell his story? "They" wanted to divide Cyprus but great Greek heroes didn't let them? Weren't they colloborators of "them"?
What's the meaning of being in the same alliance but still having interest conflicts over Cyprus? Was Cyprsu problem same at every stage of it's history? No. Did Packard have knowledge abt other stages of Cyprus problem? Or he just has knowledge abt the events of 1964? Hasn't partition always been an alternative solution for the Cyprus problem? Didn't "they" officially negotiated abt partition in 1964 and 1965? What's new with what Packard tells?
What serves best to the interests of western alliance? A divided Cyprus or united Cyprus? None... The only thing serves their interests is non interest conflict between Greeks and Turks over Cyprus; be it in a united Cyprus or divided.
In 1964, backwards and onwards; they might did/tried this and that in order to solve the problem between Turks and Greeks and what they tried/did might cause this or that... In the end, what they did was all for keeping the western alliance stable... and don't forget that, the representatives of vast majority of 2 communities have always given support to right wing parties that colloborated with allies to supposedly solve the Cyprus problem. "They" always exerted to satisfy the demands of Turks and Greeks to end the conflict between them.
The essential of the problem is the interest conflicts in our region between Turks and Greeks. Had allies not mediated/interfered; be sure much more blood would have been shed and most probably Turkey would have owned Cyprus by military force...
What's ur conclusions regarding the events of 1964?