Cyprus-Forum.com

[Get Real!]

Who's talking about Ottoman remnants?

That’s right! They’ve had a name change recently… “Hodja’s of Cyprus” I think!

thought that was just Halil..

Err, he’s the “Happy Hodja”! Kinda like the happy Buddha!

[Paphitis]

:shock: Further evidence why Piratis is such a dangerous criminal!

We found this in his bedroom drawer…

What were you doing in his bedroom?

Oh, I forgot you were married!

[Paphitis]

I am bored with going round in circles . The fact is that, now the UBP is firmly back in power, Turkey will cement its hold over the northern part of Cyprus over the next two decades and the game is over.

There exist inidgenous Australians who argue that Australia is their country, that they were invaded and robbed of their land and that the descendants of these invaders should all leave. This argument does not differ in substance from the kind of thing we are hearing here. Why should Aborigines be expected to conform to an alien, imported culture that was imposed on them by invaders? Surely those who came later should have known that they were coming to an Aboriginal island and conform to that Aboriginal culture or else leave? It is precisely the same argument that you apply to Cyprus applied to Australia.

No its not. The English settled in the aboriginies lands during the time when slavery was around, women were not allowed to vote and people mostly moved by horse and cart.

In 1974 when the Cypriots were kicked out of their homes by an ARMY, there existed the UN, transcontinental flights were common and the Pontiac GTO was doing 120mph.

We are doing 1571 here, actually, and the collective guilt that the Turkish Cypriot community still supposedly bears today for that event.

As far as 1974 goes, yes, there is no comparison.

Your argument about

that they were invaded and robbed of their land and that the descendants of these invaders should all leave. This argument does not differ in substance from the kind of thing we are hearing here

refers to 1974.

We are talking about troops and settlers to leave not TC's.

I am getting more and more puzzled. Where does the phrase 'Ottoman remnants' fit in with 1974?

If you go back to my original post, you will see that I used quotation marks!

[Paphitis]

It is not what all indigenous Australians think. Do you not see the strong parallels between the arguments that Cyprus is a Greek island and everybody else is an outsider, and the following?:

Aboriginal Australians have lived in Australia over 40,000 years. It has been a long argued view of European anthropologists and prehistorians that modern humanity migrated South to Australia. This fails to explain, however, why older forms of modern human beings have not been found outside the continent. The legends and religious beliefs of modern Aboriginal Australia have no stories of migration. There is no evidence of migration memories anywhere in our country. This is a religious position taken by Aboriginal Australians, and science has failed to refute it."

Before 1788, Aboriginal Australians enjoyed a nomadic lifestyle where men, women and children lived in harmony with each other and the environment. Mother Earth was regarded as sacred which everyone respected and did not exploit. The healthy lifestyle changed dramatically when the invaders arrived from England headed by Captain Cook. The land was claimed by them through a law that still exists today called "terra nullius", meaning "no man's land". The British government wanted to establish the penal colony because of the overcrowding in their own country. It was estimated that about one million Australian Aborigines inhabited the country with 500 different tribes in 1788. Today, in 1992, 200 years later, there are 300,000 left. Many were killed with guns, poisoned water holes and food, and many died from diseases introduced by the invaders. A document from the late 1700's states: "Some convicts were allowed to have the weekends free from the confines of their masters' properties on the condition that they brought back with them aboriginal scalps. These scalps were, in fact, pairs of ears."

The remainder of the Aborigines were placed on reserves and missions where white management had total control over their Aboriginal lifestyle. The hunted and gathered foods were replaced with high carbohydrate rations. Language and ceremonies were forbidden, as it was seen as paganistic to the invaders' superior, Christian values. The colonists brought with them their social order and notion of property, their birth rights and Christianity. With their invisible luggage they brought their racial prejudice. Aboriginal men were drastically losing their role in society by being used to slave labour. The women were used as domestics and sexual partners for the white invaders. Raping and killings continued as a sport. And I quote: "One gorges at the Sunday afternoon manhunts of sexual mutilation, of burying live Aboriginal babies up to their necks in sand and kicking their heads off after tying with a rape the severed neck of the husband around the raped spouse."

40,000 years? You Hellenic fundamentalists are only talking about 10,000!

You can read more at http://www.ipoaa.com/unrelenting_strugg ... ndigen.htm

I already answered you previously! Is it really necessary to repeat ourselves?

I am very much beginning to doubt whether you have ever been to Cyprus at all, but if you came and took the trouble to observe the Greek and Turkish Cypriot communities, you would realise that that, culturally speaking, they are very similar, so the kind of issues you raise do not apply.

Whether I have been to Cyprus or not is irrelevant.

Yes, the GCs and TCs are similar. This may shock you, but I know many TCs and have a few close friendships with TCs in Cyprus. This is also irrelevant!

It is interesting that you speak of Australia. Would it seem a rational statement to you if an indigenous Australian said to you, "You knew you were coming to our island when you came here." Nobody wills their own birth so nobody can be held guilty for the fact of being born, or the circumstances surrounding their birth.

I never said that anyone should feel guilty about their birth and neither did Piratis. You are exaggerating and taking things out of context.

The point is, that Australia is a democratic nation, and anyone who wishes to adopt it as their new country should also respect the Australian culture. If Australia wanted Union with New Zealand, then Maoris that live in Australia should respect the desires of the majority. The Aborigines have never even attempted to destroy democracy in Australia so your analogy seems invalid to me, because many TCs are guilty of exactly that.

You either accept the legitimacy of the Republic of Cyprus as founded under the 1959/1960 agreements, or you don't. It is a simple choice. If you do, then you have to accept that provision is made for citizenship of that Republic in annex D of the Treaty of Establishment. There is no reference here to 'Ottoman remnants'; the Turkish Cypriots are equal and legitimate citizens of the Republic under the agreements. The use of the term 'Ottoman remnants' is tantamount to a rejection of the Republic as defined in the agreements. You are perfectly entitled to make that choice but please don't pretend to do one when you are actually doing the other.

And as I told you before, I personally don't have an issue with accepting the 1959 Zurich Agreement, and therefore I fully recognize the right of TCs to RoC citizenship, health care, and social welfare.

I accept that TCs are equal citizens and would even fight for their very basic democratic and human rights as EQUAL citizens of the RoC. But the TCs want their special status which is anything but EQUAL to their compatriots which account for 82% of the total population of the island.

Therefore, they are unwilling to fight for our EQUAL rights and their actions are anything but democratic. You may call this "the spoils of war" and there is only one way this can be reversed. Will they fight for my rights?

Please do concentrate. Also, please note the quotation marks! Thanks!

[DT.]

The point is, that Australia is a democratic nation, and anyone who wishes to adopt it as their new country should also respect the Australian culture.

come on man

[Tim Drayton]

So how, essentially, does the Aboriginal argument that they were in Australia first and had the land stolen from them, so that they have first claim on the place, differ from the argument that Greeks came to Cyprus earlier and had the land stolen from them (by the Lusignians actually) thereby having first claim on the island? You have not addressed that.

My real point is that, in the case of Australia, it makes far more sense to argue that there exists a UN-recognised nation of Australia that is not such a bad place and everybody should live in harmony as equal citizens regardless of which ethnic groups arrived when. I think the same is valid for Cyprus.

[Paphitis]

So how, essentially, does the Aboriginal argument that they were in Australia first and had the land stolen from them, so that they have first claim on the place, differ from the argument that Greeks came to Cyprus earlier and had the land stolen from them (by the Lusignians actually) thereby having first claim on the island? You have not addressed that.

My real point is that, in the case of Australia, it makes far more sense to argue that there exists a UN-recognised nation of Australia that is not such a bad place and everybody should live in harmony as equal citizens regardless of which ethnic groups arrived when. I think the same is valid for Cyprus.

You are reducing this into something it is not!

Turkey invaded the island in 1974, has ethnically cleansed and continues to occupy the northern portion and has Turkified it.

The RoC was and still is a sovereign nation and member of the UN. That is what we have been saying all along.

[BirKibrisli]

Tim,
You have to realise there is a lot of inconsistency and hypocricy with certain GC forumers ,enough to take your breath away...When it comes to Australia they do not expect the invading power to respect and adapt to the culture and traditions of the natives...They tell you that was not how things were done in 1788...But with the same breath they say they expected the Ottomans to have respected and adapted to the cultures and traditions of the natives in Cyprus,in 1571.... The fact that the Ottomans were far more respecting of the native people's culture,religion,and languages in 1571 than the British were in 1788 just doesn't enter their twisted minds...

The TCs are the Ottoman remnants who are all guilty at birth even when that birth happened in Cyprus hundreds of years after the original invasion...The British empire can come to Australia declare it "terra nullius" and treat the natives worse than animals,and not a pip out of the likes of Paphidis...You will get used to them in time,and learn to shake your head in disbelief most of the time...At other times you will cry out with sensible arguments and will get garbled non-sensical arguments thrown back at you...That is life in our little Cyprus Forum world...

[Tim Drayton]

So how, essentially, does the Aboriginal argument that they were in Australia first and had the land stolen from them, so that they have first claim on the place, differ from the argument that Greeks came to Cyprus earlier and had the land stolen from them (by the Lusignians actually) thereby having first claim on the island? You have not addressed that.

My real point is that, in the case of Australia, it makes far more sense to argue that there exists a UN-recognised nation of Australia that is not such a bad place and everybody should live in harmony as equal citizens regardless of which ethnic groups arrived when. I think the same is valid for Cyprus.

You are reducing this into something it is not!

Turkey invaded the island in 1974, has ethnically cleansed and continues to occupy the northern portion and has Turkified it.

The RoC was and still is a sovereign nation and member of the UN. That is what we have been saying all along.

You are the one who is turning this into soemthing that it is not. To remind you, you are acting as an apologist to Piratis when he says to Birkibrisli, a Cyprus-born Turkish Cypriot: "you knew that you were coming to a Greek island when you first came here". Birkibrisli was born before 1974, and he never came to Cyprus, he was born here. Why are you suddenly introducing the red herring of 1974?

[BirKibrisli]

So how, essentially, does the Aboriginal argument that they were in Australia first and had the land stolen from them, so that they have first claim on the place, differ from the argument that Greeks came to Cyprus earlier and had the land stolen from them (by the Lusignians actually) thereby having first claim on the island? You have not addressed that.

My real point is that, in the case of Australia, it makes far more sense to argue that there exists a UN-recognised nation of Australia that is not such a bad place and everybody should live in harmony as equal citizens regardless of which ethnic groups arrived when. I think the same is valid for Cyprus.

You are reducing this into something it is not!

Turkey invaded the island in 1974, has ethnically cleansed and continues to occupy the northern portion and has Turkified it.

The RoC was and still is a sovereign nation and member of the UN. That is what we have been saying all along.

And why did Turkey invade Cyprus in 1974,can you tell us that, MR Paphidis???? Was the sovereign nation that was the ROC at the time sovereign because that is how the GCs wanted it??? Or it was sovereign because the TCs refused to give away their country to Greece in the first place???Come on,show us how objective you are on recent Cyprus history, going back a little bit further than 1974 to,say,1950....