Cyprus-Forum.com

[Oracle]

This is a really sensitive issue and I am loathe to ask, but too curious to leave alone until I understand a little better.

There are various lists circulating about the number of TCs missing (~500) from the 60s to the time of the second invasion of 1974. These include a number from, for example, Tokhni and Maratha whom we are told were dug up showing the signs of GC torture and murder.

The problem is, these "missing" figures seem to also be included in the "dead" (killed/murdered) TCs lists.

So, some casualties would appear to be both on the dead and the missing lists ... or have I got this completely wrong?

[YFred]

This is a really sensitive issue and I am loathe to ask, but too curious to leave alone until I understand a little better.

There are various lists circulating about the number of TCs missing (~500) from the 60s to the time of the second invasion of 1974. These include a number from, for example, Tokhni and Maratha whom we are told were dug up showing the signs of GC torture and murder.

The problem is, these "missing" figures seem to also be included in the "dead" (killed/murdered) TCs lists.

So, some casualties would appear to be both on the dead and the missing lists ... or have I got this completely wrong?

It is interesting that you find the list itself more interesting then the people and their demise. Fcuk off you demented excuse for human.

[Paphitis]

This is a really sensitive issue and I am loathe to ask, but too curious to leave alone until I understand a little better.

There are various lists circulating about the number of TCs missing (~500) from the 60s to the time of the second invasion of 1974. These include a number from, for example, Tokhni and Maratha whom we are told were dug up showing the signs of GC torture and murder.

The problem is, these "missing" figures seem to also be included in the "dead" (killed/murdered) TCs lists.

So, some casualties would appear to be both on the dead and the missing lists ... or have I got this completely wrong?

Oh FFS!

[erolz3]

There are those that were murdered in this period. Of those murdered in this period the largest subset is those that were murdered and had their bodies hidden in this period. These are the 'missing'. That is what the list of 'missing' from this period means. Those murdered and whos remains were then hidden.

Of that list of missing (those murderd in this period whos remains were hidden) some have had, 40+ years afterwards, their bodies located and identified and some have not. Those that have had their bodies idenitifed are not somehow no longer validly on the list of those that went 'missing' - ie those that were murdered and had their bodies hidden in this period.

They are no longer validly on a list of those who went missing and who's bodies STILL have no be located, but this is not what the list of 'missing' is. It is a list of those who were murdered in this period and had their bodies hidden. Having had their body located and identifed 40 years later does not remove them from the list of those that went missing.

Try and work out the difference between 'went missing' - past tense and 'are missing' present tense and the 'better understanding' you claim to be seeking in the original post should follow.

[Paphitis]

There are those that were murdered in this period. Of those murdered in this period the largest subset is those that were murdered and had their bodies hidden in this period. These are the 'missing'. That is what the list of 'missing' from this period means. Those murdered and whos remains were then hidden.

Of that list of missing (those murderd in this period whos remains were hidden) some have had, 40+ years afterwards, their bodies located and identified and some have not. Those that have had their bodies idenitifed are not somehow no longer validly on the list of those that went 'missing' - ie those that were murdered and had their bodies hidden in this period.

They are no longer validly on a list of those who went missing and who's bodies STILL have no be located, but this is not what the list of 'missing' is. It is a list of those who were murdered in this period and had their bodies hidden. Having had their body located and identifed 40 years later does not remove them from the list of those that went missing.

Try and work out the difference between 'went missing' - past tense and 'are missing' present tense and the 'better understanding' you claim to be seeking in the original post should follow.

Erolz, you should not have dignified this thread with your response!

The woman has gone all batty!

[Oracle]

This is a really sensitive issue and I am loathe to ask, but too curious to leave alone until I understand a little better.

There are various lists circulating about the number of TCs missing (~500) from the 60s to the time of the second invasion of 1974. These include a number from, for example, Tokhni and Maratha whom we are told were dug up showing the signs of GC torture and murder.

The problem is, these "missing" figures seem to also be included in the "dead" (killed/murdered) TCs lists.

So, some casualties would appear to be both on the dead and the missing lists ... or have I got this completely wrong?

It is interesting that you find the list itself more interesting then the people and their demise. Fcuk off you demented excuse for human.

I am not morbidly interested in the allegations of how these crimes have been committed. That is your and VP's domain ... and I have heard enough!

But (some) anomalies in record keeping may be one thing we can agree on; lists should be kept accurately, for the sake of the memory of those who are still unaccounted for and to avoid misuse by those who seek to justify Turkey's presence .

I'm sorry that (possible) corrections of statistics fill you with alarm ...

[Oracle]

There are those that were murdered in this period. Of those murdered in this period the largest subset is those that were murdered and had their bodies hidden in this period. These are the 'missing'. That is what the list of 'missing' from this period means. Those murdered and whos remains were then hidden.

Of that list of missing (those murderd in this period whos remains were hidden) some have had, 40+ years afterwards, their bodies located and identified and some have not. Those that have had their bodies idenitifed are not somehow no longer validly on the list of those that went 'missing' - ie those that were murdered and had their bodies hidden in this period.

They are no longer validly on a list of those who went missing and who's bodies STILL have no be located, but this is not what the list of 'missing' is. It is a list of those who were murdered in this period and had their bodies hidden. Having had their body located and identifed 40 years later does not remove them from the list of those that went missing.

Try and work out the difference between 'went missing' - past tense and 'are missing' present tense and the 'better understanding' you claim to be seeking in the original post should follow.

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.

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.

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.

[Paphitis]

There are those that were murdered in this period. Of those murdered in this period the largest subset is those that were murdered and had their bodies hidden in this period. These are the 'missing'. That is what the list of 'missing' from this period means. Those murdered and whos remains were then hidden.

Of that list of missing (those murderd in this period whos remains were hidden) some have had, 40+ years afterwards, their bodies located and identified and some have not. Those that have had their bodies idenitifed are not somehow no longer validly on the list of those that went 'missing' - ie those that were murdered and had their bodies hidden in this period.

They are no longer validly on a list of those who went missing and who's bodies STILL have no be located, but this is not what the list of 'missing' is. It is a list of those who were murdered in this period and had their bodies hidden. Having had their body located and identifed 40 years later does not remove them from the list of those that went missing.

Try and work out the difference between 'went missing' - past tense and 'are missing' present tense and the 'better understanding' you claim to be seeking in the original post should follow.

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.

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.

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.

If you think you are so smart to question the validity of these statistics as accepted by the United Nations Committee of Missing Persons, then an equally smart TC could do the same with the 1500 registered GC missing.

Silly woman!

[YFred]

This is a really sensitive issue and I am loathe to ask, but too curious to leave alone until I understand a little better.

There are various lists circulating about the number of TCs missing (~500) from the 60s to the time of the second invasion of 1974. These include a number from, for example, Tokhni and Maratha whom we are told were dug up showing the signs of GC torture and murder.

The problem is, these "missing" figures seem to also be included in the "dead" (killed/murdered) TCs lists.

So, some casualties would appear to be both on the dead and the missing lists ... or have I got this completely wrong?

It is interesting that you find the list itself more interesting then the people and their demise. Fcuk off you demented excuse for human.

I am not morbidly interested in the allegations of how these crimes have been committed. That is your and VP's domain ... and I have heard enough!

But (some) anomalies in record keeping may be one thing we can agree on; lists should be kept accurately, for the sake of the memory of those who are still unaccounted for and to avoid misuse by those who seek to justify Turkey's presence .

I'm sorry that (possible) corrections of statistics fill you with alarm ...

Not at all, but you should start an new list and add your name to it. The title of this list is "Whilst these people are on this earth, there can never be peace"

[erolz3]

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.

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!

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 ?

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.

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' ?