Cyprus-Forum.com

[james_mav]

By the same token, Britain had no right to take the continent now known as Australia from its aboriginal inhabitants who had been there much longer. Anyhow, what right did the British have to call themselves the masters of the British Isles in the first place, since Celtic tribes inhabited these islands long before the Anglo-Saxons arrived and were later conquered by the Normans as late as 1066. Then again, the Celts were not the first people to live in the British Isles. The people who built Stonehenge lived ther well before the Celts made it that far west.

Who is defending the Brits' right to claim Australia, Ireland, or anywhere else?

If you want to bandy some Latin around, how about the phrase:

Reductio ad absurdum

This is a technique for proving a mathematical truth. The strategy involves assuming something to be true and then drawing out an absurd result (like 1 = 0) based on the initial assumption, hence showing that the assumption is false. First year maths stuff. What's it got to do with what what's being discussed here?

[Tim Drayton]

By the same token, Britain had no right to take the continent now known as Australia from its aboriginal inhabitants who had been there much longer. Anyhow, what right did the British have to call themselves the masters of the British Isles in the first place, since Celtic tribes inhabited these islands long before the Anglo-Saxons arrived and were later conquered by the Normans as late as 1066. Then again, the Celts were not the first people to live in the British Isles. The people who built Stonehenge lived ther well before the Celts made it that far west.

Who is defending the Brits' right to claim Australia, Ireland, or anywhere else?

If you want to bandy some Latin around, how about the phrase:

Reductio ad absurdum

This is a technique for proving a mathematical truth. The strategy involves assuming something to be true and then drawing out an absurd result (like 1 = 0) based on the initial assumption, hence showing that the assumption is false. First year maths stuff. What's it got to do with what what's being discussed here?

By living in the country of Australia which was established on land which was already inhabited by others you are surely de facto defending that very British claim. This argument is simply intended to demonstrate the fallacy of your reasoning.

The expression 'reductio ad absurdum' is also used in a legal and political sense. Somebody will inevitably have a prior irredentist claim that will trump any irredentist claim made by another group. This chain of reasoning can be extended to the dawn of history and even beyond and ultimately will lead nowhere.

[Tim Drayton]

Of course they are all Turks B25. In the eyes of the nationalists all dogs belong to the same breed. However, is it just peculiar (to say the least) that the little fascist is lecturing Birkibrisli?

I am neither little, nor a fascist, nor giving lectures, one of you were lying.

He claims TCs you claim Turks, not that can give ahoot, but get your lies straight before you spread them.

To me Birk, is just another TC trying to get things his way, but don't worry your little head, we know where you stand.

You missed Bananiot's point all together,B25..He was implying that to the GCs at the time,lining up to witness the massacre,those to be slaughtered were just "Turks",including my cousins,the 3 TC students..

And I guess those 500 TCs landed there to have a picnic and not to kill people?

Piratis,they were student in their early 20s studying in Turkey...when the 63 troubles began they thought they should get back to help their community survive what they thought was going to be an all out attack to wipe off the TCs...Turkish army gave them all a 2 week course in using firearms,and dumped them on this little enclave which was surrounded by the GC regulars and irregular (i have no midea who they were) in no time...They had no idea what they were doing...But soon found out they were mistakenly believed to be the avantgard of a Turkish military operation...Some were killed in the skirmishes,and all were in grave danger of starvation for the whole duration...This was the most bizarre chapter of the 63-74 period...People should know what really happened,dont you think???Instead of thinking that Turkey just wanted some target practice...But I suspect nothing will dent the armour of hatred and bitterness in certain people here...

To change tack a little, are there any plausible theories as to what Turkey's motives were in permitting/emcouraging this rag-tag group of students to stage such a landing? In strict military and strategic terms this was surely madness. It was a case of sending lambs to their slaughter.

Incidentally, does anybody know if the following eyewitness account of these events is worth reading?

[Oracle]

..I said 500 misguided and foolish TC students managed to land in Kokkina area,hoping to make their way to their villages or towns,to help fight of what they thought was an imminent GC push to wipe of all the TCs on the island[/size]...They truly believed that,that is why they risked their lives to get there...They were under a long seige,and the final assault wasonly hours away...Some GC civilians had taken up positions on the hill to watch the salaughter of the TCs in that enclave...

What a romantic spin you put on this tale, to glamorise "TC students".
They were soldiers fighting for Turkish interests.

And what evil onlookers to a slaughter you do portray the GCs as being. The Kokkina area is remote and has always been poorly populated ... so how long would it take for any number of GC civilians to group together after hearing there was going to be a "slaughter"?
Most GC civilians were afraid of TCs at that time, and demoralised by Turkish bombings to go anywhere near a battle scene.

[denizaksulu]

..I said 500 misguided and foolish TC students managed to land in Kokkina area,hoping to make their way to their villages or towns,to help fight of what they thought was an imminent GC push to wipe of all the TCs on the island[/size]...They truly believed that,that is why they risked their lives to get there...They were under a long seige,and the final assault wasonly hours away...Some GC civilians had taken up positions on the hill to watch the salaughter of the TCs in that enclave...

What a romantic spin you put on this tale, to glamorise "TC students".
They were soldiers fighting for Turkish interests.

And what evil onlookers to a slaughter you do portray the GCs as being. The Kokkina area is remote and has always been poorly populated ... so how long would it take for any number of GC civilians to group together after hearing there was going to be a "slaughter"?
Most GC civilians were afraid of TCs at that time, and demoralised by Turkish bombings to go anywhere near a battle scene.

The GCs were terrified yes. Who wouldnt be?. But until then, what did they do?. I dont expect an answer Oracle; really.

[Piratis]

That Turkey woke up one day and decided it was a nice day to drop some napalm on Cyprus???

Bir, Turkey had a plan for the partition of Cyprus since the 50s. They didn't just wake up on morning ...

I don't know the exact facts of that story, but my best guess is that Turkey dropped those 500 people there so later she could come to "save" them by killing innocent GCs. 500 people would not move from Turkey to Cyprus without the knowledge of the Turkish army.

But why deny the actual facts on the day???The bombing was a direct response to the attack on the TC enclave...There were people lining up to watch the massacre of the TCs...I know you are finding his incredible today,but closing your mind to it will not change the facts...All I am saying is this :let us all try to be open minded about the facts and the events,not in denial that only one side is capale of attrocities,only one side is guilty of crimes against humanity...If you keep justifying everything,finding excuses to clear your side of any wrong doing,we will not get anywhere...That is the biggest obstacle to peace in Cyprus...Both sides paint themselves whiter than white..Both sides accuse the other one of everything under the sun...When both sides truly accept their part in this mess,we might find a way out...Not before..

We accepted our part in the mess Bir. But I have 2 questions for you:

1) How much responsibility the GC side has?
2) How does the past excuse the TCs from demanding yet more gains and privileges for themselves on the expense of our human and democratic rights?

You are asking simple questions regarding very complicated matters,Piratis...If you accept your part in the mess,then you accept 50-50 responsibility...

Can I accept our real part in the mess, which is far less than 50%, or you will not be satisfied unless we accept responsibility for far more than what we are really responsible for? You ask from me to acknowledge our wrong doings, and I do, but you should also acknowledge your sides wrong doings. The combined responsibility of Turkey + TCs is far more than the one of GCs and I would hope you can acknowledge this.

The picture is not that clear and simple on your second question either.
The only TCs who gained privileges from our troubles are those close to Denktas and his ruling elite,and those close to the upper echolons of the TMT...Most TCs,like myself,lost everything,including our birthright,to live peacefully without fear in our own country...It is a furphy that the TCs have gained big time from your suffering and loss...Today we are on the brink of cultural extinction...At least you have 66% of your country to practice your democratic rights in...We have become endangered species in our own county,having to justify how Turkish and how Islamic we are at every turn.Our political will have been highjacked by the settlers,and our spirit has been crushed by our"rescuers "who remind us every day we owe them our lives...Please don't talk to me about the TC gains and provileges..it is all in your head...

It is not in my head Bir. It is in the constitution which was imposed on Cyprus. E.g. that the 30% of civil servant positions (the most sought after positions in Cyprus) were given to the 18% of TCs. Isn't this a TC privilege on our expense? Is such thing fair? You didn't enjoy those privileges on our expense because those agreements collapsed.

Now I am asking you about the future: Do you think that the TCs should again have gains on our expense, and even more than those that they had with the 1960 agreements? If yes, why?

it is so frustrating discussing anything with you ,Piratis...Because you totally ignore the aguments I am making,and keep repeating your stock phrases.....Okey I will play your game..I will do the same...Now listen..
The TCs benefited from the constitution of 1960 which you are talking about for 3 short years...And it is debatable how much they benefited because it was still very much a GC dominated power structure...Yes,TCs did have a bit more than what their nembers justified,but still the GCs had the overwhelming majority in both cabinet and parliament..If you were a bit more sensitive to their fears of domination by the GCs and made that constitution work as intended,we wouldnt be in this mess...So looking from it from that angle,it is ALL your fault...100%....How do you like my argument now???I am only following your tactics...Now where will we go from here???How will we find a solution...You have been enjoying all the benefits of the constitutiion now for over 45 years...Who is the greedy one here??REmember I am using your logic now...Thinking in black and white...Tell me how you justify sitting on all the tools of power for 45 years ,getting rich,while the TC had been all but wiped out from the face of Cyprus....

No, you are not using my logic. Because with my logic nobody is punished and nobody is rewarded based on what happened in the past.

The logic you are using is the logic of VP: Trying to blame us for what happened in the past and in this way excuse yet more crimes and human rights violations against us.

Now I want to hear YOUR logic. So I ask you again: Do you think that the TCs should again have gains on our expense, and even more than those that they had with the 1960 agreements? If yes, why?

If you share the VP logic, then please let me know. And then I will give you a detailed reply to what you said using the VP logic.

By logic I really meant TACTICS...I appologise for the clumsines of my expression...You totally ignore any part of the other person's agrument,and just repeat your democracy and human rights argument ad infinitum...I told Oracle why the Turkish jets bombed Cyprus when they did...I said 500 misguided and foolish TC students managed to land in Kokkina area,hoping to make their way to their villages or towns,to help fight of what they thought was an imminent GC push to wipe of all the TCs on the island...They truly believed that,that is why they risked their lives to get there...They were under a long seige,and the final assault wasonly hours away...Some GC civilians had taken up positions on the hill to watch the salaughter of the TCs in that enclave...What was your responce??? "Well,they did not come to have picnic"...That's it...Robot like...The implication??As usual,they deserved all they got... If you had said something like 'Yes ,I know that part of this story,but...how did the GCs know they were not Turkish soldiers?? Or even "the GCs probably thought hey were paving the way for a larger invasion force,so they had to be eliminated" i would say you were prepared to discuss this point sensibly and logically...But no...it suits you for Oracle and the likes to think Turkey was just target practising when they dropped napalm on poor innocent GCs...This is what you do Piratis...This is what is so frustrating...others are copying you too...So we will never get to the point where we can talk like two people really trying to find a middle ground to forge an agreement...I am playing your game from now on...totally ignoring the parts in your agreement that does not suit the TC side...See what frustration is like...But I am probably wasting my time... You are so used to this tactic it is water off ducks back...Sorry,mate. Untill you find some empathy and compassion for the TCs and the position they find temselves in,hence making it a realistic discussion getting us to some point where a compromise might be possible,I will ignore all your points...You have done ur dash...

Unlike you, I always answer when I am asked a direct question.

The question is: Do you think that the TCs should again have gains on our expense, and even more than those that they had with the 1960 agreements? If yes, why?

Instead of answering the question you are trying to give an excuse to everything the Turks and TCs did, while you aparently do not show the same kind of understanding to the actions of GCs.

You can't ask from me to acknowledge the suffering of TCs and the crimes committed against them (which I did) and then at the same time try to excuse all crimes of the TCs and Turkey against us presenting them as the "innocent children" who were misled and have no responsibility for their actions.

[Piratis]

To change tack a little, are there any plausible theories as to what Turkey's motives were in permitting/emcouraging this rag-tag group of students to stage such a landing? In strict military and strategic terms this was surely madness. It was a case of sending lambs to their slaughter.

This was exactly my question Tim. This is why I asked if they went there for a picnic.

These people were 500 armed men, and they were obviously armed and brought to Cyprus by Turkey.

If they were indeed so helpless as Bir says, then why were they send to Cyprus by Turkey? Are the Turkish Generals idiots?

Bir asked if Turkey woke up one day and decided it was a nice day to drop some napalm on Cyprus. Apparently dropping napalm on Cyprus was not something decided that day, but a plan conceived much earlier. Bringing those 500 people in Cyprus so Turkey could come later and "save" them by bombing innocent people with napalm was apparently part of the plan.

If anybody has some more logical explanation then I would like to hear it.

[Tim Drayton]

The Fractures of a Struggle:
Remembering and Forgetting Erenköy

Rebecca Bryant
George Mason University

http://www.prio.no/upload/Rebecca%20Bryant.doc

[Piratis]

The Fractures of a Struggle:
Remembering and Forgetting Erenköy

Rebecca Bryant
George Mason University

http://www.prio.no/upload/Rebecca%20Bryant.doc

Not a single mention of the word "napalm". Presenting the TMT as heroes. She even talks about how they were bringing weapons from Turkey to Cyprus in the 50s with no mention about how those weapons were used: To attack innocent Greek Cypriots and start the inter-communal conflict.

I read 3 pages of this document (and made a search for the word "napalm") and it was more than enough to understand what it was all about.

In many occasions in this forum I exposed PRIO as a pro-Turkish organization. This document is yet another confirmation.

[Piratis]

And the two sources she gives in her document are from www.trncinfo.com and www.turkishforum.com

I am not surprised, since she is an employee of the Turks:

http://www.ncc.metu.edu.tr/academic/CV/ ... BRYANT.pdf