Cyprus-Forum.com

[Bananiot]

Are you saying they don't count Deniz?

[Oracle]

From the Hansard archives....

We all know about the plebiscite carefully organised under Archbishop Makarios in 1950, when two books were placed in the churches and the people were gathered in by special messengers: the priests urged them in, and they were made to come, and in public every citizen had to write either in one book or the other. In one book it said: "I am in favour of annexation by Greece." In the other it said: "I am not in favour." Funnily enough, 95 per cent. of the population voted in favour. I can only say that I express my great admiration for the 5 per cent. who risked their lives by voting against it. I can think of countries where the vote is 99.99 per cent. in those circumstances.

http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/lord ... 02P0-03077

This is illogical garbage. The British wanted to discount the referendum and so they made up anything they wished. Not long before, many GCs fought for the British in WWII on the understanding that Enosis would be allowed. What possible reason could the GCs have had to prefer to stay under the Brits, or forever under the threat of Turks?

After all, they only needed 51% to say 'yes' to Enosis. Why make it look "iffy" by enticing 95%?

[repulsewarrior]

de calme s.v.p.

this picture started with Lord Byron; of course Greeks in Cyprus wanted what was (and still is) a poet's glorious dream. Makarios wanted ENOSIS but faced with a Zurich meeting where his adversaries would tear the island in two (or three), he chose as a Cypriot. don't dismiss the Cold War, the last page of it still has to close; what of the Green Line? i don't think that anyone can deny that somewhere in his thinking something changed, and in it a realisation that Cyprus belonged to Cypriots. to their credit, Greek Cypriots being a vast majority did not rise up against him and the coup leaders' enemies in '74, nor have they resorted to terror since then aganst their brethren who seemingly support the Turkish Army's Occupation.

what the rabble of farmers and their ilk saw was Injustice in a Modern World from which they were no longer isolated. Freedom fighters, they were, and for those that laid down their arms having won it, we applaud them.

[Paphitis]

de calme s.v.p.

this picture started with Lord Byron; of course Greeks in Cyprus wanted what was (and still is) a poet's glorious dream. Makarios wanted ENOSIS but faced with a Zurich meeting where his adversaries would tear the island in two (or three), he chose as a Cypriot. don't dismiss the Cold War, the last page of it still has to close; what of the Green Line? i don't think that anyone can deny that somewhere in his thinking something changed, and in it a realisation that Cyprus belonged to Cypriots. to their credit, Greek Cypriots being a vast majority did not rise up against him and the coup leaders' enemies in '74, nor have they resorted to terror since then aganst their brethren who seemingly support the Turkish Army's Occupation.

what the rabble of farmers and their ilk saw was Injustice in a Modern World from which they were no longer isolated. Freedom fighters, they were, and for those that laid down their arms having won it, we applaud them.

No RW! Makarios was blackmailed into signing the Zurich Agreement. As a Cypriot, he should not have signed such a racist and undemocratic agreement which would eventually see the island partitioned.

This was his/our biggest mistake!

[Paphitis]

From the Hansard archives....

We all know about the plebiscite carefully organised under Archbishop Makarios in 1950, when two books were placed in the churches and the people were gathered in by special messengers: the priests urged them in, and they were made to come, and in public every citizen had to write either in one book or the other. In one book it said: "I am in favour of annexation by Greece." In the other it said: "I am not in favour." Funnily enough, 95 per cent. of the population voted in favour. I can only say that I express my great admiration for the 5 per cent. who risked their lives by voting against it. I can think of countries where the vote is 99.99 per cent. in those circumstances.

http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/lord ... 02P0-03077

This is illogical garbage. The British wanted to discount the referendum and so they made up anything they wished. Not long before, many GCs fought for the British in WWII on the understanding that Enosis would be allowed. What possible reason could the GCs have had to prefer to stay under the Brits, or forever under the threat of Turks?

After all, they only needed 51% to say 'yes' to Enosis. Why make it look "iffy" by enticing 95%?

Very few Cypriots were against EOKA and the struggle for self determination between 1955-1959. Some who were against EOKA and its struggle, decided to collaborate with the British, and this cost the lives of some EOKA fighters and resulted in others being arrested. EOKA had to deal with them, and it did, whenever possible!

[repulsewarrior]

...it was a great experiment, and it still is, Bicommunality, although no one as yet has had the courage to embrace its meaning. of course it was a kind of blackmail because he had to choose between the island as a Heritance over being Greek, and he chose the way which keeps our dream for one Cyprus alive.

if it wasn't for the Junta, NATO and other forces...

Cyprus cannot be Turkish, nor can it belong to anyone else, therefore its impotence being necessary, the impasse continues with the Rights of all Cypriots left as a sub-issue.

[Paphitis]

...it was a great experiment, and it still is, Bicommunality, although no one as yet has had the courage to embrace its meaning. of course it was a kind of blackmail because he had to choose between the island as a Heritance over being Greek, and he chose the way which keeps our dream for one Cyprus alive.

if it wasn't for the Junta, NATO and other forces...

Cyprus cannot be Turkish, nor can it belong to anyone else, therefore its impotence being necessary, the impasse continues with the Rights of all Cypriots left as a sub-issue.

I agree about the Junta, and other forces.

As for NATO, well, we kind of asked for it and copped it real bad! We shouldn't have messed with them. Our non alliance was another disaster, as there was no way NATO would not see our pandering to the Communist Block as a clear provocation and threat to Middle Eastern and NATO security.

But, if it were not for the Zurich Agreements, there would not have been a need for the 13 amendments and the ensuing inter communal break down that immediately followed. There probably would have been less fanaticism from both sides, the TCs might not have retreated into enclaves to facilitate the invasion of 74.

The Zurich Agreement was the beginning of the Cyprus Calamity.

Makarios should not have signed it.

Bicummunality is a very ridiculous notion RW. No modern country would even consider splitting its population into communities. This concept is what will destroy Cyprus, and the concept was introduced by Britain as a means to control the island, and Makarios caved in and signed one of the most racist constitutions the modern world has seen!

[repulsewarrior]

it will be the solution in Jerusalem, and it will bring peace to the albanese (kosovo) as well. it is the opening the human race needs if Nation and State are to have seperate identities with any success.

it is not an issue of "Greek" and "Turk". People are Individuals and Persons; this is what Bicommunal is about.

[Paphitis]

it will be the solution in Jerusalem, and it will bring peace to the albanese (kosovo) as well. it is the opening the human race needs if Nation and State are to have seperate identities with any success.

it is not an issue of "Greek" and "Turk". People are Individuals and Persons; this is what Bicommunal is about.

It is an issue of Greek and Turk, but should be an issue of Cypriots as one identifier unique to Cyprus only.

[Viewpoint]

As long as you are in control?