Cyprus-Forum.com

[insan]

Most British media are anti-Cyprus mainly because of the colonial history of the island.

It is very strange, because most Brits that visit Cyprus fall in love with the place and its people and they come back again and again and only have positive things to say. Thats been my experience.

So British media does not really represent the vast majority of Brits that come to the island. They basically represent the interests of people in positions of power.

Could it be because "u" consider everything that is not in boundaries of Greeek/GC propaganda or believes as anti-GC/Greek?

[The Cypriot]

The FT is as pro-Turkey as they come!

Thats right. Nothing new. Most AngloAmerican media are pro-Turkish, but FT, "The Independent" and a few other are among the worst.

Agreed. But, if Cypriot private and public sector organisations take note of the FTs negative stance on issues of fundamental importance to Cyprus, then this is likely to cost them in the very near future.

What sort of "costs" are we talking about here?

Financial costs.

Suing? On what grounds?

No. Not suing...

[The Cypriot]

Most British media are anti-Cyprus mainly because of the colonial history of the island.

It is very strange, because most Brits that visit Cyprus fall in love with the place and its people and they come back again and again and only have positive things to say. Thats been my experience.

So British media does not really represent the vast majority of Brits that come to the island. They basically represent the interests of people in positions of power.

The FT in particular represents financial interests.. no doubt a lot of money is riding on Turkey's continued EU accession.

[The Cypriot]

Today's FT, making more sense in relation to German reunification 20 years ago - and Britain's objections then. Interesting parallels with Cyprus.

[insan]

In fact, it regurgitates the Turkish position so completely that it could well have been written by the Turkish foreign ministry. For example, the report says:

'The EU brought this problem [i.e. the problem Cyprus poses for Turkey's EU accession] upon itself by accepting Cyprus’s one million inhabitants into the Union even though they had yet to resolve their inter-communal differences.' – i.e even though the Republic of Cyprus easily fulfilled EU membership criteria, the EU was wrong to let the Republic of Cyprus join – and the Cyprus problem is not one of invasion and occupation, but of damaged relations between Greek and Turkish Cypriots.

Also: 'The republic broke down in 1963,when the Greek Cypriots excluded Turkish Cypriot leaders from government and drove the Turkish Cypriots into barricaded quarters of towns and isolated villages.'

This is, of course, hook, line and sinker, the Turkish propaganda version of events. A more honest history would acknowledge that the Turkish Cypriots were engaged in a political and terrorist campaign aimed at partition and that they voluntarily withdrew from the organs of state and any isolation and ghettoisation they suffered was self-imposed, as Turk nationalists sought to concentrate the island's Turk population in preparation for Turkish invasion and enforced ethnic division

U may find it interesting to read Dhe Gibriago, though the source and the interpretations come from a Hellenic umbrella.

http://hellenicantidote.blogspot.com/20 ... ehind.html

[The Cypriot]

In fact, it regurgitates the Turkish position so completely that it could well have been written by the Turkish foreign ministry. For example, the report says:

'The EU brought this problem [i.e. the problem Cyprus poses for Turkey's EU accession] upon itself by accepting Cyprus’s one million inhabitants into the Union even though they had yet to resolve their inter-communal differences.' – i.e even though the Republic of Cyprus easily fulfilled EU membership criteria, the EU was wrong to let the Republic of Cyprus join – and the Cyprus problem is not one of invasion and occupation, but of damaged relations between Greek and Turkish Cypriots.

Also: 'The republic broke down in 1963,when the Greek Cypriots excluded Turkish Cypriot leaders from government and drove the Turkish Cypriots into barricaded quarters of towns and isolated villages.'

This is, of course, hook, line and sinker, the Turkish propaganda version of events. A more honest history would acknowledge that the Turkish Cypriots were engaged in a political and terrorist campaign aimed at partition and that they voluntarily withdrew from the organs of state and any isolation and ghettoisation they suffered was self-imposed, as Turk nationalists sought to concentrate the island's Turk population in preparation for Turkish invasion and enforced ethnic division

U may find it interesting to read Dhe Gibriago, though the source and the interpretations come from a Hellenic umbrella.

http://hellenicantidote.blogspot.com/20 ... ehind.html

Thanks, insan... it was interesting. How I'd love to go over to the Independent Commission and bang a few heads together, for their lack of insight.

But it's great the the Cyprus problem is now the EU's problem - and of course Turkey's problem. Because when it was just our problem no one was prepared to do anything about it.

[insan]

In fact, it regurgitates the Turkish position so completely that it could well have been written by the Turkish foreign ministry. For example, the report says:

'The EU brought this problem [i.e. the problem Cyprus poses for Turkey's EU accession] upon itself by accepting Cyprus’s one million inhabitants into the Union even though they had yet to resolve their inter-communal differences.' – i.e even though the Republic of Cyprus easily fulfilled EU membership criteria, the EU was wrong to let the Republic of Cyprus join – and the Cyprus problem is not one of invasion and occupation, but of damaged relations between Greek and Turkish Cypriots.

Also: 'The republic broke down in 1963,when the Greek Cypriots excluded Turkish Cypriot leaders from government and drove the Turkish Cypriots into barricaded quarters of towns and isolated villages.'

This is, of course, hook, line and sinker, the Turkish propaganda version of events. A more honest history would acknowledge that the Turkish Cypriots were engaged in a political and terrorist campaign aimed at partition and that they voluntarily withdrew from the organs of state and any isolation and ghettoisation they suffered was self-imposed, as Turk nationalists sought to concentrate the island's Turk population in preparation for Turkish invasion and enforced ethnic division

U may find it interesting to read Dhe Gibriago, though the source and the interpretations come from a Hellenic umbrella.

http://hellenicantidote.blogspot.com/20 ... ehind.html

Thanks, insan... it was interesting. How I'd love to go over to the Independent Commission and bang a few heads together, for their lack of insight.

But it's great the the Cyprus problem is now the EU's problem - and of course Turkey's problem. Because when it was just our problem no one was prepared to do anything about it.

I don't remember it's been only our problem... Since 50's it's been the problem of Cypriots, Turkey, Greece and thus NATO. Remeber that most members of NATO r also members of EU.

Urgency of solving the Cyprus problem, mainly arise from negatively affected NATO-EU relations.

[The Cypriot]

Yes, but Cyprus wasn't in the EU then; its ability to make a stink has increased markedly since 2004 - which is what annoys the FT so much.

[insan]

Yes, but Cyprus wasn't in the EU then; its ability to make a stink has increased markedly since 2004 - which is what annoys the FT so much.

Yes, but stinking ability of GC administration strongly depends on the political stances of especially Greece and particularly France against Turkey.

World of economics is based on realities not Hellenic national cause.

[Viewpoint]

The GC south being in the EU hasnt chnaged anything, you are still no closer to a solution than you were 35 years ago, keep up the good work.