Cyprus-Forum.com

[Talisker]

European settlement in Australia and the Ottoman invasion of Cyprus are 2 completely different things. Firstly, Europeans arrived in Australia in 1788. They came in peace, traded with the Aborigines and the Dutch East Indies Company. Relations between the Europeans and the Aborigines was cordial to begin with. So it would be more correct to compare the parallels between European Colonization in Australia, with let's say Hellenic, Phoenician, and Sea Pirate colonization of Cyprus since Cyprus too had its own Aborigines (Eteo-Cypriots) or the Anlgo-Saxon colonization of the British Isles since there were native peoples there as well.

Wow, the Dutch East Indies company was ahead of the game! How convenient for the first colonisers in 1788! This thread is not so much about the beginnings of the situations which have lead to some of the descendents of the indigenous peoples bemoaning the cataclysmic events which resulted in the unsatisfactory (in their eyes) current situations, which in turn brings them to the conclusion that the incoming populations should 'go home', as about the feeling that the indigenous population has been disadvantaged as a result of these historical events. And try to understand these sentiments.

Furthermore, if all 'migrants' and their offspring were to leave Australia, then the continents population will dwindle to 200,000. What will be the ramifications? The ramifications would be that all of Asia will collapse overnight. Markets will crash, China, India, Japan, Taiwan etc will collapse since they are reliant on our resources. And the knock on effect. The US will decay into depression and become insolvent, Canada will as well, and it will be the end of the EU and you can kiss Greece goodbye(lights out). Billions of people will be unemployed around the world, and famine will claim millions. That is how important Australian resources are to the world economy. They drive pretty much the entire Asian economy.

I am not advocating a mass 'return to roots' but aiming to consider the effect of these human migrations on the indigenous peoples. But good to see you have such faith in the importance of Australia to the various regional economies.

Quoting an Aboriginal at the Alice Springs pub on social welfare payment day, after a gut full of booz, is not to be taken too seriously. Yes, Aboriginal Australia has many problems to this day. Alcohol abuse, domestic violence, Aboriginal health concerns, welfare, and even petrol sniffing and drug abuse. Some may well want 'Europeans' to leave. Others won't. An aboriginal tracker in the Army, Ernie Dingo and Aboriginal Elders would want things to remain as they are. So why is this the case? Well, the Aboriginal Community is the wealthiest community in Australia by far, thanks to mining royalties, and that is still the case when you compare them as a collective community to the world's wealthiest city, Perth.

Wow, you're quite the archetypal Aussie, Paphiti. Perhaps this aboriginal gentleman is a highly educated professional enjoying a quiet drink after a hard week at work - however, you launch in with your declaration that this individual is on welfare, and completely pissed! And the social problems you list are certainly not exclusive to aboriginal populations (although unfortunately common, and possibly due to their disadvantaged position in societies they did not shape or mould). Perhaps it is attitudes such as yours which lead Aborigines to wish Australia had not been colonised by Europeans since 1788.

[Talisker]

I do agree with you.

One thing that bothers me is the use of these 'scientific' studies to prove something. I cant but help thinking that it is similar to Hitlers mind-set and the Mein Kampf. Use these differences to justify a 'wrong-doing'. What matters now is that Cypriots are there and where do we go from here. Telling one part of the population to 'go home' only inflames any serious discussion. For real Turkish Cypriots, the only home they know, even for their fore-fathers is Cyprus.

I must add that all the scientific studies involving the haplogroups etc(not my cup of tea btw) although interesting, belongs to a more serious discussion forum, and should not be used to prove a point re: the Cyprob.It is easy to cut and paste these documents, but to the average person it is all gobble-de-gook.

Sorry, don't agree with you on your last point - I think the higher level the debate the better, and that when someone makes a serious point they should have to substantiate it (credible evidence?) - if this means reference to serious scientific publications or UN documents or historical dissertations so be it. The forum should not be 'dumbed down' to the lowest common denominator - it provides an opportunity to learn as well as divulge facts and opinions.

[denizaksulu]

I do agree with you.

One thing that bothers me is the use of these 'scientific' studies to prove something. I cant but help thinking that it is similar to Hitlers mind-set and the Mein Kampf. Use these differences to justify a 'wrong-doing'. What matters now is that Cypriots are there and where do we go from here. Telling one part of the population to 'go home' only inflames any serious discussion. For real Turkish Cypriots, the only home they know, even for their fore-fathers is Cyprus.

I must add that all the scientific studies involving the haplogroups etc(not my cup of tea btw) although interesting, belongs to a more serious discussion forum, and should not be used to prove a point re: the Cyprob.It is easy to cut and paste these documents, but to the average person it is all gobble-de-gook.

Sorry, don't agree with you on your last point - I think the higher level the debate the better, and that when someone makes a serious point they should have to substantiate it (credible evidence?) - if this means reference to serious scientific publications or UN documents or historical dissertations so be it. The forum should not be 'dumbed down' to the lowest common denominator - it provides an opportunity to learn as well as divulge facts and opinions.

I do read these debates with interest, but I would not advocate their use in justifying who has more right here etc. Debate? Yes by all means, but I am wary of the misuse of data to be a 'divisive' tool.

[Paphitis]

European settlement in Australia and the Ottoman invasion of Cyprus are 2 completely different things. Firstly, Europeans arrived in Australia in 1788. They came in peace, traded with the Aborigines and the Dutch East Indies Company. Relations between the Europeans and the Aborigines was cordial to begin with. So it would be more correct to compare the parallels between European Colonization in Australia, with let's say Hellenic, Phoenician, and Sea Pirate colonization of Cyprus since Cyprus too had its own Aborigines (Eteo-Cypriots) or the Anlgo-Saxon colonization of the British Isles since there were native peoples there as well.

Wow, the Dutch East Indies company was ahead of the game! How convenient for the first colonisers in 1788! This thread is not so much about the beginnings of the situations which have lead to some of the descendents of the indigenous peoples bemoaning the cataclysmic events which resulted in the unsatisfactory (in their eyes) current situations, which in turn brings them to the conclusion that the incoming populations should 'go home', as about the feeling that the indigenous population has been disadvantaged as a result of these historical events. And try to understand these sentiments.

Furthermore, if all 'migrants' and their offspring were to leave Australia, then the continents population will dwindle to 200,000. What will be the ramifications? The ramifications would be that all of Asia will collapse overnight. Markets will crash, China, India, Japan, Taiwan etc will collapse since they are reliant on our resources. And the knock on effect. The US will decay into depression and become insolvent, Canada will as well, and it will be the end of the EU and you can kiss Greece goodbye(lights out). Billions of people will be unemployed around the world, and famine will claim millions. That is how important Australian resources are to the world economy. They drive pretty much the entire Asian economy.

I am not advocating a mass 'return to roots' but aiming to consider the effect of these human migrations on the indigenous peoples. But good to see you have such faith in the importance of Australia to the various regional economies.

Quoting an Aboriginal at the Alice Springs pub on social welfare payment day, after a gut full of booz, is not to be taken too seriously. Yes, Aboriginal Australia has many problems to this day. Alcohol abuse, domestic violence, Aboriginal health concerns, welfare, and even petrol sniffing and drug abuse. Some may well want 'Europeans' to leave. Others won't. An aboriginal tracker in the Army, Ernie Dingo and Aboriginal Elders would want things to remain as they are. So why is this the case? Well, the Aboriginal Community is the wealthiest community in Australia by far, thanks to mining royalties, and that is still the case when you compare them as a collective community to the world's wealthiest city, Perth.

Wow, you're quite the archetypal Aussie, Paphiti. Perhaps this aboriginal gentleman is a highly educated professional enjoying a quiet drink after a hard week at work - however, you launch in with your declaration that this individual is on welfare, and completely pissed! And the social problems you list are certainly not exclusive to aboriginal populations (although unfortunately common, and possibly due to their disadvantaged position in societies they did not shape or mould). Perhaps it is attitudes such as yours which lead Aborigines to wish Australia had not been colonised by Europeans since 1788.

Silly me!

Look, I'm not really interested! But just to agree with your last statement, we have many hard working Aborigines in Australia. They, I'm certain would not be making stupid statements such as those you have quoted from an Aboriginal in the Alice Springs pub.

Whether the Dutch East Indies Company is a convenient excuse or not, the colonization of Australia is strikingly similar to the colonization of Cyprus, British Isles, and the Americas. There are no parallels with the Ottoman invasion. And if the English did not colonize Australia, then either the Dutch, French, or Spanish would've. So the end result would be the same, except for the fact that Australia would be more French, Dutch or Spanish as opposed to British!

Some Cypriots here, are also claiming Eteo-Cypriot lineage(I have no idea how they know for sure) and have told many other 'Greek' Cypriots to go home as well! So what's the difference between this and the Aboriginal in the Alice Springs pub?

[DTA]

I do agree with you.

One thing that bothers me is the use of these 'scientific' studies to prove something. I cant but help thinking that it is similar to Hitlers mind-set and the Mein Kampf. Use these differences to justify a 'wrong-doing'. What matters now is that Cypriots are there and where do we go from here. Telling one part of the population to 'go home' only inflames any serious discussion. For real Turkish Cypriots, the only home they know, even for their fore-fathers is Cyprus.

I must add that all the scientific studies involving the haplogroups etc(not my cup of tea btw) although interesting, belongs to a more serious discussion forum, and should not be used to prove a point re: the Cyprob.It is easy to cut and paste these documents, but to the average person it is all gobble-de-gook.

Sorry, don't agree with you on your last point - I think the higher level the debate the better, and that when someone makes a serious point they should have to substantiate it (credible evidence?) - if this means reference to serious scientific publications or UN documents or historical dissertations so be it. The forum should not be 'dumbed down' to the lowest common denominator - it provides an opportunity to learn as well as divulge facts and opinions.

The GC are not the first population of cyprus, neither arethe GC the first empire to populate cyprus.... so by the same token should you not go home?

[Oracle]

I do agree with you.

One thing that bothers me is the use of these 'scientific' studies to prove something. I cant but help thinking that it is similar to Hitlers mind-set and the Mein Kampf. Use these differences to justify a 'wrong-doing'. What matters now is that Cypriots are there and where do we go from here. Telling one part of the population to 'go home' only inflames any serious discussion. For real Turkish Cypriots, the only home they know, even for their fore-fathers is Cyprus.

I must add that all the scientific studies involving the haplogroups etc(not my cup of tea btw) although interesting, belongs to a more serious discussion forum, and should not be used to prove a point re: the Cyprob.It is easy to cut and paste these documents, but to the average person it is all gobble-de-gook.

Sorry, don't agree with you on your last point - I think the higher level the debate the better, and that when someone makes a serious point they should have to substantiate it (credible evidence?) - if this means reference to serious scientific publications or UN documents or historical dissertations so be it. The forum should not be 'dumbed down' to the lowest common denominator - it provides an opportunity to learn as well as divulge facts and opinions.

The GC are not the first population of cyprus, neither arethe GC the first empire to populate cyprus.... so by the same token should you not go home?

The indigenous Cypriots (now termed GCs) have been the ONLY unbroken inhabitants of Cyprus according to archaeological records extending to at least 10,000 BCE and that is as much assurance of our nativeness as is necessary. Other islands have been inhabited for longer, like Australia (~30,000) ... but the facts for Cyprus are continual habitation by Mediterraneans (the same tribes as moved back and forth to Greece and its islands and Asia minor) for the era of the seafarers (now further extended by records to ~20,000 BCE).

[DTA]

Are you saying that the Greeks were in cyprus before the Hitties? because that goes against everything I have read, can you get me a credible (non greek or GC) historical link please.

[kurupetos]

Are you saying that the Greeks were in cyprus before the Hitties? because that goes against everything I have read, can you get me a credible (non greek or GC) historical link please.

Whatever was present prior to the greek arrivals was absorbed by the superior greek civilization without force. It's about time for the Turks to do the same.

[DTA]

Are you saying that the Greeks were in cyprus before the Hitties? because that goes against everything I have read, can you get me a credible (non greek or GC) historical link please.

Whatever was present prior to the greek arrivals was absorbed by the superior greek civilization without force. It's about time for the Turks to do the same.

Who says it was without force?

[Oracle]

Are you saying that the Greeks were in cyprus before the Hitties? because that goes against everything I have read, can you get me a credible (non greek or GC) historical link please.

You persist in asking an irrelevant question.

The same people who gave rise to the Greeks also gave rise to the Cypriots. There were very few distinct groups at that time (> 10,000 years ago). They were in all likelihood the same as the ones which gave rise to the Hittites. These people flowed and mixed without boundaries. Distinction did not come about until much later. Probably about 1,500 years BCE by which time the Greeks, Cypriots etc were swapping letters!

Why don't you supply what you read because you sound like you have misunderstood what you read and we are wasting time arguing your interpretation rather than relevant points.

Are there any Hittites in Cyprus who are now claiming Cyprus belongs to them? No. Because they are long ago integrated or have left.