Cyprus-Forum.com

[BirKibrisli]

why did the UN escorted cars from nicosia to kyrenia...who was taking pot shots at them?...

No one ...The escorts were a precautionary measure,and rightly so given the heat at the time...As far as I know not one shot was fired at any of the convoys for the whole duration 1963-74....If you know differently I am willing to listen...

my recollection is that the convoys were UN organized because of pot shots...it was unsafe to travel on your own...

if as you say it was for precautionary measures, why would the UN organize convoys?...was there a threat or there was action for the UN to take these measures...

The UN had to be seen to be doing something useful...I honestly cannot recall any incident where shots were fired on the convoys...This might've been because of the presence of the UN...Can you imagine the hatred and the bitterness and the fear which filled the very air we breathed in Cyprus those days...The UN often escorted the TC convoys too while they passed GC controled areas...It was not a precaution for the GCs only...When did you leave Cyprus,boomers??? Or were you born in Oz?

[BirKibrisli]

Halil, someone who met his first GC 30 years after the invasion is not someone who can give an accurate accout of anything in my view.

I have no problem with the truths coming out about the wrongs of the GC leadership. What I despise is the hypocrisy of "forgetting" partition plans that were drawn up before there ever WAS a Republic.

DT...Nobody,let alone myself,ever denied that there were Partition plans prepared by the TMT and its leadership during the late 50s....This is/was no secret...The TCs were shouting it from the rooftops,literally...The fact that there were documents left behind by TC politicians when they escaped in a hurry in fear of their lives no doubt,is news to me...I simply didnt know that ...But the whole point is,and what you seem to insist on denying,there would have been no Taksim plans if there were no Enosis demands in the first place...How else will I put this??? Taksim plans were a desperate,last ditch response to ENOSIS...How long will you keep denying this?????

[denizaksulu]

why did the UN escorted cars from nicosia to kyrenia...who was taking pot shots at them?...

No one ...The escorts were a precautionary measure,and rightly so given the heat at the time...As far as I know not one shot was fired at any of the convoys for the whole duration 1963-74....If you know differently I am willing to listen...

my recollection is that the convoys were UN organized because of pot shots...it was unsafe to travel on your own...

if as you say it was for precautionary measures, why would the UN organize convoys?...was there a threat or there was action for the UN to take these measures...

The UN had to be seen to be doing something useful...I honestly cannot recall any incident where shots were fired on the convoys...This might've been because of the presence of the UN...Can you imagine the hatred and the bitterness and the fear which filled the very air we breathed in Cyprus those days...The UN often escorted the TC convoys too while they passed GC controled areas...It was not a precaution for the GCs only...When did you leave Cyprus,boomers??? Or were you born in Oz?

After leaving Cyprus in 1963, I returned for a visit to see my relatives in 1968. I remember well the earthworks on either side of the Kyrenia - Nicosia road, which was to protect the travellers to Kyrenia, Gonyeli, Ortakoy, Kirni etc. These were to protect the travellers from Greek Cyp fire. Naturally there were Greek bus convoys using the same road. The athmosherethen was tense.

[halil]

why did the UN escorted cars from nicosia to kyrenia...who was taking pot shots at them?...

No one ...The escorts were a precautionary measure,and rightly so given the heat at the time...As far as I know not one shot was fired at any of the convoys for the whole duration 1963-74....If you know differently I am willing to listen...

my recollection is that the convoys were UN organized because of pot shots...it was unsafe to travel on your own...

if as you say it was for precautionary measures, why would the UN organize convoys?...was there a threat or there was action for the UN to take these measures...

The UN had to be seen to be doing something useful...I honestly cannot recall any incident where shots were fired on the convoys...This might've been because of the presence of the UN...Can you imagine the hatred and the bitterness and the fear which filled the very air we breathed in Cyprus those days...The UN often escorted the TC convoys too while they passed GC controled areas...It was not a precaution for the GCs only...When did you leave Cyprus,boomers??? Or were you born in Oz?

After leaving Cyprus in 1963, I returned for a visit to see my relatives in 1968. I remember well the earthworks on either side of the Kyrenia - Nicosia road, which was to protect the travellers to Kyrenia, Gonyeli, Ortakoy, Kirni etc. These were to protect the travellers from Greek Cyp fire. Naturally there were Greek bus convoys using the same road. The athmosherethen was tense.

I also remmember the convoys. Convoys was passing from Ortaköy-Gönyeli-Boğaz to Kyrenia. Because of fears and to protect travellers. While they were passing all our cars were stopping to let the convoys to pass because in those days roads were to narrow.

Because of fear and safety we were scaring to go Kyrenia. Because after Bogaz village ,Greek Cypriots controlled area was coming. Most of us never see the sea in our life up to 74. we were stacked between Turkish sector of the Nicosia and Bogaz village.

Thanks to god those days are gone.

[YFred]

The UK House of Commons Select Committee on Foreign Affairs reviewed the Cyprus question in 1987[121] and reported unanimously that, "Although the Cyprus Government now claims to have been seeking to "operate the 1960 Constitution modified to the extent dictated by the necessities of the situation" this claim ignores the fact that both before and after the events of December 1963 the Makarios Government continued to advocate the cause of ENOSIS [annexation to Greece] and actively pursued the amendment of the Constitution and the related treaties to facilitate this ultimate objective".


The Committee continued : "Moreover in June 1967 the Greek Cypriot legislature unanimously passed a resolution in favour of ENOSIS, in blatant contravention of the 1960 Treaties and Constitution."[122]


121: H.C. no. 23 of 1986-87. 2nd July 1987

122: Art. 1 of the Treaty of Guarantee declares prohibited any action likely to promote directly or indirectly union with any other state or partition of the island, and Art. 185(2) of the Constitution is to similar effect.



The distinguished philosopher, Michael Moran, of Sussex University, made the following diagnosis of Greek Cypriot attitudes[142]: "It was because they were under a kind of ideological spell, a collective mental condition similar to what Marxists used to call "false-consciousness" that the Greek Cypriots could embark upon their particular course of action in December 1963 with all the zeal and confidence they did. Brainwashed through at least a hundred years of school-teaching and sermonising into a set of beliefs pathologically at odds with any plausible account of historical and political realities; lacking contact with a counterbalancing tradition of rational criticism; for the most part incapable of ironic scepticism towards theological obfuscation—the Greek Cypriot leaders were effectively de-sensitised to the equally important rights of the Turkish Cypriots. In this way they were able to treat their Turkish compatriots with such consistent and irrational abuse, hardly noticing that this was in fact what they were doing."

142: "Sovereignty Divided"-1998 p.12.

Thankyou Halil for more propaganda written by your favourite Mr Michael Stephen. Making his quotes look representative of the UK parliament used to be a talent of VP. Congrats and welcome to the club.

the above can be found at http://www.ataa.org/reference/trnc/genocide_trnc.html and it is all prepared by guess who?:

Written evidence submitted by Michael Stephen[107]


Now if you wanna find some real interesting documents filed with the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Commons on February 27, 1987) then have a look at these.

The Turkish Cypriot leadership made full use of their constitutional privileges to block decisions of the government and render the administration of the young republic difficult and inefficient. Their ulterior motives were presented in two top-secret documents, found in December 1963 in the office of Niazi Plumer, one of the three Turkish ministers in the government. These documents, covering the period between October 1959 and October 1963 explained in great detail the policy of the Turkish Cypriot leadership, a policy in which the 1959 agreements were an interim stage toward partition. (Copies of both documents are appended as annexes 8 and 9 in the memorandum submitted by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Cyprus to the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Commons on February 27, 1987).

Please post copies of these documents on this thread DT.

As Kikapu would say: CASE CLOSED!

The documents we indeed submitted to the House of Commons foriegn affairs. This is common knowledge in Cyprus. The date of submission is there and the tc minister who had left them behind Niazi Plumer is also on the record. Perhaps Bill C or Jerry can fill in ab archive request at the House of Commons and get us a copy.

This however goes to show the huge amount of history and facts that people like BIR and HALIL have chosen to forget. The Turkish side had a clear agenda of partition since the inception and before of the Republic of 1960. Makarios also had an agenda but why is it that a couple of supposedly righteous guys like Bir, Halil and Bananiot should choose to leave these details behind?

In case anyone missed it..

Niazi Plumer a former TC minister of the Republic of Cyprus had vacated his office in 1963 and in the safe, documents had been found issued by Kutchuk and Denktash detailing the policy to be followed for disruption of the Republic and leading to partition from 1959 onwards.

And who planted it there, again?

[denizaksulu]

The UK House of Commons Select Committee on Foreign Affairs reviewed the Cyprus question in 1987[121] and reported unanimously that, "Although the Cyprus Government now claims to have been seeking to "operate the 1960 Constitution modified to the extent dictated by the necessities of the situation" this claim ignores the fact that both before and after the events of December 1963 the Makarios Government continued to advocate the cause of ENOSIS [annexation to Greece] and actively pursued the amendment of the Constitution and the related treaties to facilitate this ultimate objective".


The Committee continued : "Moreover in June 1967 the Greek Cypriot legislature unanimously passed a resolution in favour of ENOSIS, in blatant contravention of the 1960 Treaties and Constitution."[122]


121: H.C. no. 23 of 1986-87. 2nd July 1987

122: Art. 1 of the Treaty of Guarantee declares prohibited any action likely to promote directly or indirectly union with any other state or partition of the island, and Art. 185(2) of the Constitution is to similar effect.



The distinguished philosopher, Michael Moran, of Sussex University, made the following diagnosis of Greek Cypriot attitudes[142]: "It was because they were under a kind of ideological spell, a collective mental condition similar to what Marxists used to call "false-consciousness" that the Greek Cypriots could embark upon their particular course of action in December 1963 with all the zeal and confidence they did. Brainwashed through at least a hundred years of school-teaching and sermonising into a set of beliefs pathologically at odds with any plausible account of historical and political realities; lacking contact with a counterbalancing tradition of rational criticism; for the most part incapable of ironic scepticism towards theological obfuscation—the Greek Cypriot leaders were effectively de-sensitised to the equally important rights of the Turkish Cypriots. In this way they were able to treat their Turkish compatriots with such consistent and irrational abuse, hardly noticing that this was in fact what they were doing."

142: "Sovereignty Divided"-1998 p.12.

Thankyou Halil for more propaganda written by your favourite Mr Michael Stephen. Making his quotes look representative of the UK parliament used to be a talent of VP. Congrats and welcome to the club.

the above can be found at http://www.ataa.org/reference/trnc/genocide_trnc.html and it is all prepared by guess who?:

Written evidence submitted by Michael Stephen[107]


Now if you wanna find some real interesting documents filed with the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Commons on February 27, 1987) then have a look at these.

The Turkish Cypriot leadership made full use of their constitutional privileges to block decisions of the government and render the administration of the young republic difficult and inefficient. Their ulterior motives were presented in two top-secret documents, found in December 1963 in the office of Niazi Plumer, one of the three Turkish ministers in the government. These documents, covering the period between October 1959 and October 1963 explained in great detail the policy of the Turkish Cypriot leadership, a policy in which the 1959 agreements were an interim stage toward partition. (Copies of both documents are appended as annexes 8 and 9 in the memorandum submitted by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Cyprus to the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Commons on February 27, 1987).

Please post copies of these documents on this thread DT.

As Kikapu would say: CASE CLOSED!

The documents we indeed submitted to the House of Commons foriegn affairs. This is common knowledge in Cyprus. The date of submission is there and the tc minister who had left them behind Niazi Plumer is also on the record. Perhaps Bill C or Jerry can fill in ab archive request at the House of Commons and get us a copy.

This however goes to show the huge amount of history and facts that people like BIR and HALIL have chosen to forget. The Turkish side had a clear agenda of partition since the inception and before of the Republic of 1960. Makarios also had an agenda but why is it that a couple of supposedly righteous guys like Bir, Halil and Bananiot should choose to leave these details behind?

In case anyone missed it..

Niazi Plumer a former TC minister of the Republic of Cyprus had vacated his office in 1963 and in the safe, documents had been found issued by Kutchuk and Denktash detailing the policy to be followed for disruption of the Republic and leading to partition from 1959 onwards.

And who planted it there, again?

Never mind that, I wish they got the name right. He was known as Fadhil/Fazil N Plumer. (Egyptian extract) with a foul mouth -the Minister of health. I was fifteen when he swore at me by calling me a 'pezevenk bashi'. 'If true' why would they keep such documents at the ministry?

[denizaksulu]

The UK House of Commons Select Committee on Foreign Affairs reviewed the Cyprus question in 1987[121] and reported unanimously that, "Although the Cyprus Government now claims to have been seeking to "operate the 1960 Constitution modified to the extent dictated by the necessities of the situation" this claim ignores the fact that both before and after the events of December 1963 the Makarios Government continued to advocate the cause of ENOSIS [annexation to Greece] and actively pursued the amendment of the Constitution and the related treaties to facilitate this ultimate objective".


The Committee continued : "Moreover in June 1967 the Greek Cypriot legislature unanimously passed a resolution in favour of ENOSIS, in blatant contravention of the 1960 Treaties and Constitution."[122]


121: H.C. no. 23 of 1986-87. 2nd July 1987

122: Art. 1 of the Treaty of Guarantee declares prohibited any action likely to promote directly or indirectly union with any other state or partition of the island, and Art. 185(2) of the Constitution is to similar effect.



The distinguished philosopher, Michael Moran, of Sussex University, made the following diagnosis of Greek Cypriot attitudes[142]: "It was because they were under a kind of ideological spell, a collective mental condition similar to what Marxists used to call "false-consciousness" that the Greek Cypriots could embark upon their particular course of action in December 1963 with all the zeal and confidence they did. Brainwashed through at least a hundred years of school-teaching and sermonising into a set of beliefs pathologically at odds with any plausible account of historical and political realities; lacking contact with a counterbalancing tradition of rational criticism; for the most part incapable of ironic scepticism towards theological obfuscation—the Greek Cypriot leaders were effectively de-sensitised to the equally important rights of the Turkish Cypriots. In this way they were able to treat their Turkish compatriots with such consistent and irrational abuse, hardly noticing that this was in fact what they were doing."

142: "Sovereignty Divided"-1998 p.12.

Thankyou Halil for more propaganda written by your favourite Mr Michael Stephen. Making his quotes look representative of the UK parliament used to be a talent of VP. Congrats and welcome to the club.

the above can be found at http://www.ataa.org/reference/trnc/genocide_trnc.html and it is all prepared by guess who?:

Written evidence submitted by Michael Stephen[107]


Now if you wanna find some real interesting documents filed with the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Commons on February 27, 1987) then have a look at these.

The Turkish Cypriot leadership made full use of their constitutional privileges to block decisions of the government and render the administration of the young republic difficult and inefficient. Their ulterior motives were presented in two top-secret documents, found in December 1963 in the office of Niazi Plumer, one of the three Turkish ministers in the government. These documents, covering the period between October 1959 and October 1963 explained in great detail the policy of the Turkish Cypriot leadership, a policy in which the 1959 agreements were an interim stage toward partition. (Copies of both documents are appended as annexes 8 and 9 in the memorandum submitted by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Cyprus to the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Commons on February 27, 1987).

Please post copies of these documents on this thread DT.

As Kikapu would say: CASE CLOSED!

The documents we indeed submitted to the House of Commons foriegn affairs. This is common knowledge in Cyprus. The date of submission is there and the tc minister who had left them behind Niazi Plumer is also on the record. Perhaps Bill C or Jerry can fill in ab archive request at the House of Commons and get us a copy.

This however goes to show the huge amount of history and facts that people like BIR and HALIL have chosen to forget. The Turkish side had a clear agenda of partition since the inception and before of the Republic of 1960. Makarios also had an agenda but why is it that a couple of supposedly righteous guys like Bir, Halil and Bananiot should choose to leave these details behind?

In case anyone missed it..

Niazi Plumer a former TC minister of the Republic of Cyprus had vacated his office in 1963 and in the safe, documents had been found issued by Kutchuk and Denktash detailing the policy to be followed for disruption of the Republic and leading to partition from 1959 onwards.

And who planted it there, again?

Never mind that, I wish they got the name right. He was known as Fadhil/Fazil N Plumer. (Egyptian extract) with a foul mouth -the Minister of health. I was fifteen when he swore at me by calling me a 'pezevenk bashi'. 'If true' why would they keep such documents at the ministry?

[YFred]

The UK House of Commons Select Committee on Foreign Affairs reviewed the Cyprus question in 1987[121] and reported unanimously that, "Although the Cyprus Government now claims to have been seeking to "operate the 1960 Constitution modified to the extent dictated by the necessities of the situation" this claim ignores the fact that both before and after the events of December 1963 the Makarios Government continued to advocate the cause of ENOSIS [annexation to Greece] and actively pursued the amendment of the Constitution and the related treaties to facilitate this ultimate objective".


The Committee continued : "Moreover in June 1967 the Greek Cypriot legislature unanimously passed a resolution in favour of ENOSIS, in blatant contravention of the 1960 Treaties and Constitution."[122]


121: H.C. no. 23 of 1986-87. 2nd July 1987

122: Art. 1 of the Treaty of Guarantee declares prohibited any action likely to promote directly or indirectly union with any other state or partition of the island, and Art. 185(2) of the Constitution is to similar effect.



The distinguished philosopher, Michael Moran, of Sussex University, made the following diagnosis of Greek Cypriot attitudes[142]: "It was because they were under a kind of ideological spell, a collective mental condition similar to what Marxists used to call "false-consciousness" that the Greek Cypriots could embark upon their particular course of action in December 1963 with all the zeal and confidence they did. Brainwashed through at least a hundred years of school-teaching and sermonising into a set of beliefs pathologically at odds with any plausible account of historical and political realities; lacking contact with a counterbalancing tradition of rational criticism; for the most part incapable of ironic scepticism towards theological obfuscation—the Greek Cypriot leaders were effectively de-sensitised to the equally important rights of the Turkish Cypriots. In this way they were able to treat their Turkish compatriots with such consistent and irrational abuse, hardly noticing that this was in fact what they were doing."

142: "Sovereignty Divided"-1998 p.12.

Thankyou Halil for more propaganda written by your favourite Mr Michael Stephen. Making his quotes look representative of the UK parliament used to be a talent of VP. Congrats and welcome to the club.

the above can be found at http://www.ataa.org/reference/trnc/genocide_trnc.html and it is all prepared by guess who?:

Written evidence submitted by Michael Stephen[107]


Now if you wanna find some real interesting documents filed with the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Commons on February 27, 1987) then have a look at these.

The Turkish Cypriot leadership made full use of their constitutional privileges to block decisions of the government and render the administration of the young republic difficult and inefficient. Their ulterior motives were presented in two top-secret documents, found in December 1963 in the office of Niazi Plumer, one of the three Turkish ministers in the government. These documents, covering the period between October 1959 and October 1963 explained in great detail the policy of the Turkish Cypriot leadership, a policy in which the 1959 agreements were an interim stage toward partition. (Copies of both documents are appended as annexes 8 and 9 in the memorandum submitted by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Cyprus to the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Commons on February 27, 1987).

Please post copies of these documents on this thread DT.

As Kikapu would say: CASE CLOSED!

The documents we indeed submitted to the House of Commons foriegn affairs. This is common knowledge in Cyprus. The date of submission is there and the tc minister who had left them behind Niazi Plumer is also on the record. Perhaps Bill C or Jerry can fill in ab archive request at the House of Commons and get us a copy.

This however goes to show the huge amount of history and facts that people like BIR and HALIL have chosen to forget. The Turkish side had a clear agenda of partition since the inception and before of the Republic of 1960. Makarios also had an agenda but why is it that a couple of supposedly righteous guys like Bir, Halil and Bananiot should choose to leave these details behind?

In case anyone missed it..

Niazi Plumer a former TC minister of the Republic of Cyprus had vacated his office in 1963 and in the safe, documents had been found issued by Kutchuk and Denktash detailing the policy to be followed for disruption of the Republic and leading to partition from 1959 onwards.

And who planted it there, again?

Never mind that, I wish they got the name right. He was known as Fadhil/Fazil N Plumer. (Egyptian extract) with a foul mouth -the Minister of health. I was fifteen when he swore at me by calling me a 'pezevenk bashi'. 'If true' why would they keep such documents at the ministry?

It seems to me very convenient, but I guess it can fool the gullible great unwashed very easily even after all these years.

[denizaksulu]

The UK House of Commons Select Committee on Foreign Affairs reviewed the Cyprus question in 1987[121] and reported unanimously that, "Although the Cyprus Government now claims to have been seeking to "operate the 1960 Constitution modified to the extent dictated by the necessities of the situation" this claim ignores the fact that both before and after the events of December 1963 the Makarios Government continued to advocate the cause of ENOSIS [annexation to Greece] and actively pursued the amendment of the Constitution and the related treaties to facilitate this ultimate objective".


The Committee continued : "Moreover in June 1967 the Greek Cypriot legislature unanimously passed a resolution in favour of ENOSIS, in blatant contravention of the 1960 Treaties and Constitution."[122]


121: H.C. no. 23 of 1986-87. 2nd July 1987

122: Art. 1 of the Treaty of Guarantee declares prohibited any action likely to promote directly or indirectly union with any other state or partition of the island, and Art. 185(2) of the Constitution is to similar effect.



The distinguished philosopher, Michael Moran, of Sussex University, made the following diagnosis of Greek Cypriot attitudes[142]: "It was because they were under a kind of ideological spell, a collective mental condition similar to what Marxists used to call "false-consciousness" that the Greek Cypriots could embark upon their particular course of action in December 1963 with all the zeal and confidence they did. Brainwashed through at least a hundred years of school-teaching and sermonising into a set of beliefs pathologically at odds with any plausible account of historical and political realities; lacking contact with a counterbalancing tradition of rational criticism; for the most part incapable of ironic scepticism towards theological obfuscation—the Greek Cypriot leaders were effectively de-sensitised to the equally important rights of the Turkish Cypriots. In this way they were able to treat their Turkish compatriots with such consistent and irrational abuse, hardly noticing that this was in fact what they were doing."

142: "Sovereignty Divided"-1998 p.12.

Thankyou Halil for more propaganda written by your favourite Mr Michael Stephen. Making his quotes look representative of the UK parliament used to be a talent of VP. Congrats and welcome to the club.

the above can be found at http://www.ataa.org/reference/trnc/genocide_trnc.html and it is all prepared by guess who?:

Written evidence submitted by Michael Stephen[107]


Now if you wanna find some real interesting documents filed with the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Commons on February 27, 1987) then have a look at these.

The Turkish Cypriot leadership made full use of their constitutional privileges to block decisions of the government and render the administration of the young republic difficult and inefficient. Their ulterior motives were presented in two top-secret documents, found in December 1963 in the office of Niazi Plumer, one of the three Turkish ministers in the government. These documents, covering the period between October 1959 and October 1963 explained in great detail the policy of the Turkish Cypriot leadership, a policy in which the 1959 agreements were an interim stage toward partition. (Copies of both documents are appended as annexes 8 and 9 in the memorandum submitted by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Cyprus to the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Commons on February 27, 1987).

Please post copies of these documents on this thread DT.

As Kikapu would say: CASE CLOSED!

The documents we indeed submitted to the House of Commons foriegn affairs. This is common knowledge in Cyprus. The date of submission is there and the tc minister who had left them behind Niazi Plumer is also on the record. Perhaps Bill C or Jerry can fill in ab archive request at the House of Commons and get us a copy.

This however goes to show the huge amount of history and facts that people like BIR and HALIL have chosen to forget. The Turkish side had a clear agenda of partition since the inception and before of the Republic of 1960. Makarios also had an agenda but why is it that a couple of supposedly righteous guys like Bir, Halil and Bananiot should choose to leave these details behind?

In case anyone missed it..

Niazi Plumer a former TC minister of the Republic of Cyprus had vacated his office in 1963 and in the safe, documents had been found issued by Kutchuk and Denktash detailing the policy to be followed for disruption of the Republic and leading to partition from 1959 onwards.

And who planted it there, again?

Never mind that, I wish they got the name right. He was known as Fadhil/Fazil N Plumer. (Egyptian extract) with a foul mouth -the Minister of health. I was fifteen when he swore at me by calling me a 'pezevenk bashi'. 'If true' why would they keep such documents at the ministry?

It seems to me very convenient, but I guess it can fool the gullible great unwashed very easily even after all these years.

But what if?

Like Nasreddin Hodja chucking yogurt into the lake and hoping........

What if the lake would turn into yogurt.

Lets see if any authenticated documents are produced. But then so what? We now know what was going on.

[Oracle]

Personal anecdotes are all well and very lovely, but they do not lend weight to reality. I could also relate my views on the fact that as a 5 year old I screamed so hard that I didn't want chicken but only spaghetti and when (coincidentally) the Turks carried out yet another aerial bombardment I was then forever told if I didn't eat chicken the Turks could come and bomb us. How absurd ... and that is exactly how Deniz and YFred sound to me, right now!