Cyprus-Forum.com

[Get Real!]

It’s just as well the forum doesn't offer any bigger fonts…

[Paphitis]

Please try and accept that Ankara's Apartheid is a way of maintaining the ethnic cleansing. As was the Annan Plan ....

http://www.mfa.gov.cy/mfa/mfa2006.nsf/A ... enDocument

ADDRESS BY THE PRESIDENT OF PSEKA MR. PHILIP CHRISTOPHER AT THE 16TH WORLD CONFERENCE OF OVERSEAS CYPRIOTS 24-28 AUGUST 2009 - Date: 24/08/2009

Furthermore, no mention of the word Apartheid!

Mr. Philip Christopher also needs to check his facts before making a fool of himself. Fancy that!

NOT THE REPUBLIC OF 1974 THAT WAS BRUTALLY VICTIMIZED AND ILLEGALLY INVADED BY A COUNTRY THAT ASPIRES TO BE A MEMBER OF THE EUROPEAN UNION.

Once again, the word Apartheid was not mentioned as opposed to ethnic cleansing and occupation. because Mr. Philip Christopher is not as silly as you are!

Furthermore, I am still waiting for a credible link that defeats my official RoC and UN source!

THE REPUBLIC OF CYPRUS THAT REJECTED THE SEGRAGIONIST, APARTHEID STYLE SOLUTION EMBODIES IN THE 'ANAN' PLAN IS


Also, Apartheid was mentioned to describe the UN's Annan Plan and was not used as a term to describe Turkey's ETHNIC CLEANSING!

[Oracle]

Please try and accept that Ankara's Apartheid is a way of maintaining the ethnic cleansing. As was the Annan Plan ....

http://www.mfa.gov.cy/mfa/mfa2006.nsf/A ... enDocument

ADDRESS BY THE PRESIDENT OF PSEKA MR. PHILIP CHRISTOPHER AT THE 16TH WORLD CONFERENCE OF OVERSEAS CYPRIOTS 24-28 AUGUST 2009 - Date: 24/08/2009

Furthermore, no mention of the word Apartheid!

Mr. Philip Christopher also needs to check his facts before making a fool of himself. Fancy that!

NOT THE REPUBLIC OF 1974 THAT WAS BRUTALLY VICTIMIZED AND ILLEGALLY INVADED BY A COUNTRY THAT ASPIRES TO BE A MEMBER OF THE EUROPEAN UNION.

Once again, the word Apartheid was not mentioned as opposed to ethnic cleansing and occupation. because Mr. Philip Christopher is not as silly as you are!

Furthermore, I am still waiting for a credible link that defeats my official RoC and UN source!

THE REPUBLIC OF CYPRUS THAT REJECTED THE SEGRAGIONIST, [u]APARTHEID STYLE SOLUTION EMBODIES IN THE 'ANAN' PLAN IS


Also, Apartheid was mentioned to describe the UN's Annan Plan and was not used as a term to describe Turkey's ETHNIC CLEANSING!

I never said Apartheid described Ethnic cleansing. It's a way of maintaining it!

[Oracle]

Finally:
The right to locate freely wherever one wants within a country is fundamental to all modern societies. Free movement of people among member countries is one of the most basic tenets of the European Union.

Ethnic Segregation and Ghettos
Alex Anas
State University of New York at Buffalo

[Paphitis]

Please try and accept that Ankara's Apartheid is a way of maintaining the ethnic cleansing. As was the Annan Plan ....

http://www.mfa.gov.cy/mfa/mfa2006.nsf/A ... enDocument

ADDRESS BY THE PRESIDENT OF PSEKA MR. PHILIP CHRISTOPHER AT THE 16TH WORLD CONFERENCE OF OVERSEAS CYPRIOTS 24-28 AUGUST 2009 - Date: 24/08/2009

Furthermore, no mention of the word Apartheid!

Mr. Philip Christopher also needs to check his facts before making a fool of himself. Fancy that!

NOT THE REPUBLIC OF 1974 THAT WAS BRUTALLY VICTIMIZED AND ILLEGALLY INVADED BY A COUNTRY THAT ASPIRES TO BE A MEMBER OF THE EUROPEAN UNION.

Once again, the word Apartheid was not mentioned as opposed to ethnic cleansing and occupation. because Mr. Philip Christopher is not as silly as you are!

Furthermore, I am still waiting for a credible link that defeats my official RoC and UN source!

THE REPUBLIC OF CYPRUS THAT REJECTED THE SEGRAGIONIST, [u]APARTHEID STYLE SOLUTION EMBODIES IN THE 'ANAN' PLAN IS


Also, Apartheid was mentioned to describe the UN's Annan Plan and was not used as a term to describe Turkey's ETHNIC CLEANSING!

I never said Apartheid described Ethnic cleansing. It's a way of maintaining it!

No!

Ethnic Cleansing is Ethnic Cleansing!

Get it through your thick head.

You can not attribute Apartheid over occupied territories, that have been ethnically cleansed.

You must cease using these slogans that do not apply, because all you are doing is confusing others about the real problem which is invasion, ethnic cleansing and occupation.

Turkey will easily say that YOU are free reside in the occupied territories, so where will this leave your Apartheid rhetoric other than the fact that TCs will claim that they merely work in the "GC Sector" and return home for security reasons?

[Paphitis]

Finally:
The right to locate freely wherever one wants within a country is fundamental to all modern societies. Free movement of people among member countries is one of the most basic tenets of the European Union.

Ethnic Segregation and Ghettos
Alex Anas
State University of New York at Buffalo

This does not make any mention of a country under occupation!

Because the occupying power, will not give everyone the right to reside anywhere within that country, since many areas will be converted to military areas where civilians will be prohibited!

Get it together silly woman!

[Oracle]

Finally:
The right to locate freely wherever one wants within a country is fundamental to all modern societies. Free movement of people among member countries is one of the most basic tenets of the European Union.

Ethnic Segregation and Ghettos
Alex Anas
State University of New York at Buffalo

This does not make any mention of a country under occupation!

Because the occupying power, will not give everyone the right to reside anywhere within that country, since many areas will be converted to military areas where civilians will be prohibited!

Get it together silly woman!

That was supposed to be a concluding remark, you spammer!

[Paphitis]

Finally:
The right to locate freely wherever one wants within a country is fundamental to all modern societies. Free movement of people among member countries is one of the most basic tenets of the European Union.

Ethnic Segregation and Ghettos
Alex Anas
State University of New York at Buffalo

This does not make any mention of a country under occupation!

Because the occupying power, will not give everyone the right to reside anywhere within that country, since many areas will be converted to military areas where civilians will be prohibited!

Get it together silly woman!

That was supposed to be a concluding remark, you spammer!

The topic will conclude when you realize the fact that The Geneva Convention does not even mention the word "Apartheid" in its comprehensive Articles about occupied lands and ethnic cleansing!

Ergo, this thread is just total rubbish, so pull your head in!

[Epiktitos]

Finally:
The right to locate freely wherever one wants within a country is fundamental to all modern societies. Free movement of people among member countries is one of the most basic tenets of the European Union.

Ethnic Segregation and Ghettos
Alex Anas
State University of New York at Buffalo

This does not make any mention of a country under occupation!

Because the occupying power, will not give everyone the right to reside anywhere within that country, since many areas will be converted to military areas where civilians will be prohibited!

Get it together silly woman!

That was supposed to be a concluding remark, you spammer!

The topic will conclude when you realize the fact that The Geneva Convention does not even mention the word "Apartheid" in its comprehensive Articles about occupied lands and ethnic cleansing!

Ergo, this thread is just total rubbish, so pull your head in!

Paphiti,

The Gevena conventions (note: plural; your confidence coupled with your inability to get even this small detail correct hints at your understanding of this and many other matters) relate to the treatment of the victims - both military and civillian - of war, and so are a red herring in this argument. It's unclear if you introduced them out of ignorance (probably) or disingenuity (I doubt you're clever enough). According to some ottoman turk apologists, "genocide" lacked a legal definition at the end of WW1 - do you agree with these apologists' conclusion then that because genocide had not been legally defined at the time, the ottoman turks could not have committed genocide? A simple yes/no answer will suffice.

As for the subject of the debate, you are being asked to think a little more abstractly and laterally. Like a child, you latch on to something concrete that you already know: the Apartheid of South Africa, a subject on which you are clearly expert and beyond question, owing to your familial connection to the place. What the original poster is asking you to consider is the essence of Apartheid - "separateness", as applied in order to perpetuate an unjust, illegitimate, and otherwise unsustainable political situation. While I bow down in awe of your understanding of politics in Cyprus, is it not a fact that the turkish regime encouraged with propaganda, threats, and violence, a separation of TCs from GCs from the 1960's? Is it not a fact that even today, while TCs are free to at least live in the Republic (if not easily have access to the properties) and participate in civic life as citizens of the Republic, the reciprocal is not available to GCs from the occupation regime in the north? Is it not the case that this idea of "separateness" is the rhetorical foundation of the "trnc" pseudo state?

Your inability to extract the essence of apartheid from the singular example of its implementation with which you're familiar and apply it to a situation in which the details are different but the principles the same makes your posts and arguments childish and seriously cringe-worthy for all of us. Your shrill taunts of "so pull your head in", "Get it together", "Get it through your thick head", "Philip Christopher is not as silly as you are", "have a long way to go", "Now shut up" are more appropriate for a chastised teenager rather than for a grown man. I would advise you to turn off your computer, read a few books (Tom Clancy novels don't count), maybe go to University and get an education. Hopefully we will see you again in a few years time with a new found respect for analysis and critical though.

Incidentally, will you be supporting Greece or the opposition on your upcoming trip to the World Cup finals?

[Paphitis]

Finally:
The right to locate freely wherever one wants within a country is fundamental to all modern societies. Free movement of people among member countries is one of the most basic tenets of the European Union.

Ethnic Segregation and Ghettos
Alex Anas
State University of New York at Buffalo

This does not make any mention of a country under occupation!

Because the occupying power, will not give everyone the right to reside anywhere within that country, since many areas will be converted to military areas where civilians will be prohibited!

Get it together silly woman!

That was supposed to be a concluding remark, you spammer!

The topic will conclude when you realize the fact that The Geneva Convention does not even mention the word "Apartheid" in its comprehensive Articles about occupied lands and ethnic cleansing!

Ergo, this thread is just total rubbish, so pull your head in!

Paphiti,

The Gevena conventions (note: plural; your confidence coupled with your inability to get even this small detail correct hints at your understanding of this and many other matters) relate to the treatment of the victims - both military and civillian - of war, and so are a red herring in this argument. It's unclear if you introduced them out of ignorance (probably) or disingenuity (I doubt you're clever enough). According to some ottoman turk apologists, "genocide" lacked a legal definition at the end of WW1 - do you agree with these apologists' conclusion then that because genocide had not been legally defined at the time, the ottoman turks could not have committed genocide? A simple yes/no answer will suffice.

As for the subject of the debate, you are being asked to think a little more abstractly and laterally. Like a child, you latch on to something concrete that you already know: the Apartheid of South Africa, a subject on which you are clearly expert and beyond question, owing to your familial connection to the place. What the original poster is asking you to consider is the essence of Apartheid - "separateness", as applied in order to perpetuate an unjust, illegitimate, and otherwise unsustainable political situation. While I bow down in awe of your understanding of politics in Cyprus, is it not a fact that the turkish regime encouraged with propaganda, threats, and violence, a separation of TCs from GCs from the 1960's? Is it not a fact that even today, while TCs are free to at least live in the Republic (if not easily have access to the properties) and participate in civic life as citizens of the Republic, the reciprocal is not available to GCs from the occupation regime in the north? Is it not the case that this idea of "separateness" is the rhetorical foundation of the "trnc" pseudo state?

Your inability to extract the essence of apartheid from the singular example of its implementation with which you're familiar and apply it to a situation in which the details are different but the principles the same makes your posts and arguments childish and seriously cringe-worthy for all of us. Your shrill taunts of "so pull your head in", "Get it together", "Get it through your thick head", "Philip Christopher is not as silly as you are", "have a long way to go", "Now shut up" are more appropriate for a chastised teenager rather than for a grown man. I would advise you to turn off your computer, read a few books (Tom Clancy novels don't count), maybe go to University and get an education. Hopefully we will see you again in a few years time with a new found respect for analysis and critical though.

Incidentally, will you be supporting Greece or the opposition on your upcoming trip to the World Cup finals?

First of all, let's get one thing straight. I said Geneva Convention to denote the 1949 Treaty.

The Geneva Conventions are 4 treaties in total and another 3 protocols. In singular form, it denotes the Treaty signed in 1949 and is referred to as the Geneva Convention!

I introduced the Geneva Convention because there is an insistence by another member to use unofficial rhetoric such as the word "Apartheid" to denote the segregation of 2 peoples as opposed to using the proper term of Ethnic Cleansing, which is mentioned in the Geneva Conventions. I take issue to this, because I do not believe that Apartheid is an appropriate word when the Cyprus Issue is one of invasion, ethnic cleansing and occupation.

Your insistence to use this term is not the official policy of the RoC, nor is it recognised by the UN, hence you are complicating the issue at hand. It also seems to me, that you and others want to use these terms to embellish your non existent arguments, but what you are doing is reducing Turkey's illegalities. Ethnic Cleansing can never be compared to Apartheid. Also, the definition of Ethnic Cleansing is all encompassing. It encompasses Ethnic Cleansing by extermination as well as clearing an area of peoples of a particular race and/or religion. This is not Apartheid. It is Ethnic Cleansing by an occupying power that invaded in 1974.

You hit the nail on the head when you slipped the word occupation in your statement above, now highlighted in red.

The whole definition of Ethnic Cleansing is to separate 2 peoples, by displacing one group and not letting them return. Furthermore, I reject the notion of 2 peoples in Cyprus. There can only be Cypriots - if you want the solution you desperately desire.

I will be supporting Greece in the World Cup, and I will also be supporting Australia. I hope they both do very well. If Cyprus qualified, then I would support them, naturally!