Cyprus-Forum.com

[Oracle]

Subtle uses of "went missing" and "are missing" seem to be missing from the various lists which have been branded about recently.

I can appreciate the difference, if stated. But, it seems some are not as clear as you on the difference, erolz, and thanks for taking the time to explain.

There is nothing 'subtle' about it Oracle, its plain and simple common sense. The difference does not need to be explicitly stated but can always be clearly seen from the context i which a given list is presented. If the CMP says when we locate an undientifed we look to match it to a list of the missing, clearly they mean 'those who were murderd and whos bodies were hidden and who have NOT yet been idenitifed', without having to explicitly say this. Similarly if someone is referring to the 'missing' in the context of explain the hsitory of what occured in Cyprus then they mean 'those who were killed and their bodies hidden', regardless of if the bodies were subsequently identifed 40 years later or not.

I wasn't questioning the "work in progress" by the CMP where obviously the names on the list of missing are removed as identification takes place and the list of dead grows longer.

It's still a puzzle why it should be necessary to keep a record of who was "hidden" since most murderers hide their victims, if they can.

Your apparent lack of compassion or empathy is stunning Oracle!

It's not lack of compassion for the dead which drives this question, but lack of compassion by separatists, for the living.

The difference between loosing a loved one to murder and having the closure of knowing beyond doubt they are dead and being able to lay them to rest and not having such closure is real and painful. Why then should any 'statistics' note such a difference ?

It matters when ones uses the list of "500 missing" and the list of say "600 dead" when the same names occur on both lists and further go on to extrapolate that a total of 1100 were killed!

Seems some tweaking is required so that we have a true picture of the scale of these crimes; especially since statistics keep cropping up as justification for our inability to co-exist under one banner.

No tweaking is required. Those that were murdered in this period and had the bodies hidden remain a fixed unchanging number and is no way related to if their bodies have been idenitifed and located 40 years after the fact or not.

I know, but the lists need to reflect the changing face of past and present discoveries. There is also a list (halil's) which names TCs dead at the hands of GCs from which he also heralds the January martyrs who died at the hands of Colonialists (Brits).

If you really care about 'statistics' and how numbers are manipulated for political levlerage, shall we talk about the RoC numbers for 'refugees' as a result of the events of 74? Shall we talk about how organisations like the UN and EU recognise no refugees in cyprus as a result of the events of 74, only internaly displaced people ? Shall we look at how according to the RoC statistics there are MORE refugees today than there were actual GC in the north in 74 forced to leave their homes ? How according to RoC 'refugee' status is something that is inherited and than many 'refugees' in these statistics were no even alive in 74 ? Shall we talk about where are the seperate lists of 'refugees' showing those that were actually forced from their homes in 74 vs those who have 'inherited' such a status. Shall we talk about how when the RoC and others use the offical numbers of 'refugees' in discussions about cyprus they make explicilty clear the difference between these types of refugee ? Does any of this need 'tweaking' so we have a better picture of what happend ? Will you be championing such 'tweaking' ?

I am aware of how semantics and statistics are manipulated. That is why, in this instance, I sought clarification about these lists since they have been used to justify continued separation. Feel free to start discussions on any and every wrong ....

[erolz3]

It's still a puzzle why it should be necessary to keep a record of who was "hidden" since most murderers hide their victims, if they can.

So do you yet understand the difference and why that difference warrants recording ?

It matters when ones uses the list of "500 missing" and the list of say "600 dead" when the same names occur on both lists and further go on to extrapolate that a total of 1100 were killed!

Who does this ?

I know, but the lists need to reflect the changing face of past and present discoveries.

Identifying bodies fourty + years after they were murdered and hidden does not change the reality that a person was murdered and their body hidden. Nor does failing to have yet found and idenitify their body change the reality of them having been murdered and their body hidden. The reality of people being murdered and their bodies being hidden is entirely seperate from and independant of if their bodies are susbsequently found and indentified or not.

That is why, in this instance, I sought clarification about these lists since they have been used to justify continued separation. Feel free to start discussions on any and every wrong ....

And am I free to discuss why it might be that you seem to choose to 'wonder' and 'seek clarification' about only SOME instances where you percieve a lack of clarity that few others appear to see whilst showing little or no interest in other examples where the intentful lack of clarity for politcal leverage over understanding is so much more blatant?

[Oracle]

Who does this ?

Here is one example of a "full" list of casualties ...

This is the list of all those known to have died at the hands of the Greek Cypriots. Apologies for putting this list forward as it was produced by Halil. But then he wont mind.

http://www.kibrisliturksehitler.com/sehitler.htm

This was the same list which halil (inadvertently) disclosed also listed seven "martyrs" killed by Brits (i.e. not GCs).

Identifying bodies fourty + years after they were murdered and hidden does not change the reality that a person was murdered and their body hidden.

That's not under dispute. It's the record keeping (dead or missing; which is it?) which needs streamlining if we are to stop people using inaccurate records for justifying Turkey's occupation.

... whilst showing little or no interest in other examples where the intentful lack of clarity for politcal leverage over understanding is so much more blatant?

Such as?

[Oracle]

Looks like that link no longer works .. but I think it was from this source originally posted by halil ...

http://www.kktc-sehitaileleri.org/sehitler1.html

[erolz3]

Who does this ?

Here is one example of a "full" list of casualties ...

Where in this list does anyone first list people as 'missing' then list them again as 'murdered' and then present a total for those killed that combines the two ? This is what you said happens in your orginal post. Again I ask who does this ?

That's not under dispute. It's the record keeping (dead or missing; which is it?) which needs streamlining if we are to stop people using inaccurate records for justifying Turkey's occupation.

Accurate records should be maintained, off those that died, off those that were murdered and by whom and off those that were murdered and whose bodies were subsequently hidden and by whom.

I can understand challenging the accuracy of any given list but your first posts raised not an issue of the accuracy of any given lists or even accuracy in general terms. It raised a specific 'issue', namely an issue of

some casualties would appear to be both on the dead and the missing lists ...

'Casualties' as you euphamisticaly put it, can validly be on both a 'missing' list (a list of those who were murdered and their bodies hidden) and a list of those murdered, because they were murdered and a list of dead, because they are dead.

The only time there would be a problem would be if someone was to created a total that combined these lists, that are subsets of each other, in straight numerical addition to give total figures. You have yet to show an example of anyone actualy doing this.

Your whole 'concern' seems to be over something that you seem to be unable to show actually happens.

... whilst showing little or no interest in other examples where the intentful lack of clarity for politcal leverage over understanding is so much more blatant?

Such as?

Do you REALLY have no idea what kind of 'other examples' I might be refering to ? Despite the fact I have already explicitly given you one in my previous post !

[Oracle]

Who does this ?

Here is one example of a "full" list of casualties ...

Where in this list does anyone first list people as 'missing' then list them again as 'murdered' and then present a total for those killed that combines the two ? This is what you said happens in your orginal post. Again I ask who does this ?

You truncated the full point.

That was presented as a full list of casualties killed by GCs and yet some of those people were ALSO supposedly killed by Brits.

The examples I was referring to were the dead from Tokhni and Maratha who are listed as missing and yet also are cited in the casualty figures of the dead from 1974. No distinction is made in debates and sources are not cited as evidence whenever requested, except for the one I gave you above which was later shown grouping deaths from all sources as being at the hands of GCs. So, not very reliable ....

This is a list of the missing:

http://www.atcanews.org/archive/missing.pdf

But according to Bir (page 77, Cyprus Dummies thread) the link I gave you further above, lists missing and dead. That is the list which Deniz claimed was deaths that were all due to GCs, but some of those casualties were due to Brits. So, I wanted clarification where people in debates get their lists from and if those listed as missing which are later identified are removed from the missing lists. You suggested not necessarily.