Cyprus-Forum.com

[cypezokyli]

sorry to interapt the what- is -provoking dialogue and what cyprus is

i just read that and i thought it was the right place to post it

it is on politis newspaper
http://www.politis-news.com/cgibin/hweb ... -w=ΧΡΥΣΗ@ΑΥΓΗ@&-P
sorry for the bad translation

the youing tc was talking to his friends :a gc and 2 greeks when a guy from the next table (from a group of six people) approached them and asked them why they speak in english. the gc friend of sadik explained that they couldnt all speak in greek. the other guy then asked: then what is he? the gc answered he is cypriot, and after the second question he found out that he was a tc. then all the rest of the gang stood up and started hitting both the gc and the tc. according to sadik : the attacked me on the head and then against my gc friend who supported me. to be honest they hit him more than me. it seems that for them it is worse to be a friend with a tc than being a tc. they threw me out of the coffee shop while they kept kicking my friend who was on the floor
.......
" i dont blame all the gc for what happened as i dont blame all the tc for all the bad things that happened in the past. those people are just too few." said sadik who still insist on friendship and reunification of our country

"the attack was a real shock for me. i always thought that gc and tc can live together. i still believe that but the whole thing bothered me a lot. what i am afraid is that these acts of violence will become more often among the two communities. our politicians should try to isolate these guys now that they are easy to control"

conclusions
1. i guess traitors like the gcypriot, will always get what the deserve from some real good patriots
2. unfortunately at least one person has learned from the past and doesnt blame the whole gc community. even worse he still insists that gc and tc can live together!!! what a pity such a good chance to proove our point is wasted.
....
isnt it amaziing that it is the people who try and pay for their attempts, are those who never give up?

[Piratis]

To me it is no different from saying part of the world is Greek and Greeks are part of the world

Of course there is no difference in that case, because Greece is an independent country. In Cyprus what we have is one country.

Even the parts that were owned by TC in 1960 or in 1900 or in 1850? Were these also GC (the whole of cyprus as you say)? Are no parts of Cyprus TC? Not now and not ever? Are all parts of it GC? Now and at all times in the past?

If you say the TC parts of Cyprus, meaning the villages that were exclusively TC then that would be ok. But when you say the "TC part" this is not what you mean. You mean that the land of 200.000 GCs and (much less) TCs is a TC land, which is not. It is a Cypriot land and belongs equally to all Cypriot citizens.

[Piratis]

So, all we need to do is to reject every plan that is put in front of us and then the whole world will realise that the only road forward is a recourse to the 1960 agreements. Even No 1 accepted (after 44 years) that those agreements were a blessing. Funny, that the very people that are trying to save us now thought then that those agreements were the devil's doing. After doing everything in their power to jeopardise the agreements they now tell us that we need to go back to them for salvation. In effect, we say, oops sorry and start again.

These things may happen in fairy tails ...

And who are "those people"? It is the people of your party my friend. The parties that support the government today were the parties that supported Makarios and the independence of Cyprus, while the extremists of your party, as always, they didn't respect the democratic wish of the majority, they though they knew better, and they gave to Turkey the excuse that she needed.

Return to 1960 agreements is the most possible solution, since it is the only thing agreed so far. The only thing that for sure will not happen is the Annan plan since it was rejected in the most democratic way possible.

[erolz]

If you say the TC parts of Cyprus, meaning the villages that were exclusively TC then that would be ok.

This is just getting ridiculous. Part of Cyprus is TC or Parts of Cyprus are TC - one is offensive to you and the other is not? Talk about playing with words and making mountains out of molehills!
The simple fact is you claim that a user using the user name 'cyprus is greek' is equaly offensive and has equal INTENT to cause offense as people referring to the TRNC or a TCCS. A poor argument as it stands. However to try and accomodate this view of yours and show that there is no intent to cause offense with the use of these lables on my part and to get rid of this non issue I have suggested alternatives and a willingness on my part to use them. This seems to be of little or no interest to you. It seems what is of interest to you is too keep playing the 'you are as bad or worse than us game' even on trivial issues.

But when you say the "TC part" this is not what you mean. You mean that the land of 200.000 GCs and (much less) TCs is a TC land, which is not. It is a Cypriot land and belongs equally to all Cypriot citizens.

Can you PLEASE try and stop telling me what I think and what I mean.

What do want here Piratis? To find a way to solve this (non) problem as you define it and see it or to prove that TC who have no intent to cause unessesary offesne are trying to cause offense with intent (in the same way that the choice pof user name 'cyprus is greek' was designed to cause offence)?

[Bananiot]

Piratis wrote

And who are "those people"? It is the people of your party my friend. The parties that support the government today were the parties that supported Makarios and the independence of Cyprus, while the extremists of your party, as always, they didn't respect the democratic wish of the majority, they though they knew better, and they gave to Turkey the excuse that she needed.

What in heaven are you talking about? Have you lost the capacity to understand what others are saying now? EDI did not exist in 1960 neither did DIKO and DISI and AKEL rejected the London-Zurich agreements. Makarios signed them, not because he believed in an independent Cyprus but because he was forced to do so and of course he thought, very foolishingly, that he could use them as a stepping stone for enosis. Your knowledge of history leaves a lot to be desired but you go along making up your own history, as it suits you. Get real, otherwise it will be futile to talk to you. You lower the level of discussion to zero.

[Piratis]

Bananiot you lower the level of Cypriots and the human race as a whole by supporting the violation of our human rights and the legalization of the results of ethnic cleansing.

I know history well enough. The invasion was done in 1974 and not in 1960, and the excuse for the invasion was not what was done in 1960, but what the people of your party did in 1974.

Will you never learn to respect the democratic wish of the majority? Do you always have to act against democracy and give the excuse to our enemies to hurt us?

The powers that support the government today were the powers that supported Makarios and democracy. These are the powers that today again support democracy against those that for once more, either because they are so stupid and arrogant to believe they can be above democracy, or because they are paid traitors, help our enemies to achieve their aims against our country.

[Piratis]

Erolz,
No part of Cyprus is TC. Talk about TC villages if you wish. However Famagusta is not TC, Kerynia is not TC, Morphou is not TC, and 100s of other villages that you today illegaly occupy are not TC.

Can you PLEASE try and stop telling me what I think and what I mean.

Why you don't tell me what you mean then? When you say about "TC part" do you mean the TC villages?

Or do you support that the north part of Cyprus, including all the cities and villages I mentioned above is included in this TC part?

If you can claim that the homeland of 200.000 GCs and 50.000 TCs can be called TC, then why the homeland of 650.000 GCs and 140.000 TCs can not be called GC?

In the whole Cyprus we are the 82% and yet we agree that it can be offensive for you to call the island a GC island. Can't you see how offensive it is for us to say that there is a "TC part" when that part is the homeland of 200.000 GCs?
It would be offensive even if those 200.000 were the minority(like it is in your case). Imagine how offensive it is when the GCs are also the majority in the "TC part".

So you are right, it is not the same. What you say it is much worst

[erolz]

Erolz,
No part of Cyprus is TC.

So no part of Cyprus is GC?

Why you don't tell me what you mean then? When you say about "TC part" do you mean the TC villages?

I have done. Clearly and directly. Yet still you prefer to tell me what I mean and think rather than listen or accept what I say I mean and think.

In the whole Cyprus we are the 82% and yet we agree that it can be offensive for you to call the island a GC island.

There is nothing offensive about saying that part of Cyprus is GC or GC are part of Cyprus - that is just a statement of fact. So you agree that something that is not offensive to TC and that no TC here as ever claimed is offesnice to them can be offesnive to TC?

Can't you see how offensive it is for us to say that there is a "TC part" when that part is the homeland of 200.000 GCs?
It would be offensive even if those 200.000 were the minority(like it is in your case). Imagine how offensive it is when the GCs are also the majority in the "TC part".

This whole discussion from the point at which it started with your first assertion is to me just another example of the futility of trying to have a reasoned and logical debate with you most of the time.

It started with your assertion

"Cyprus is Greek" is at least as offensive as "1/3rd of Cyprus is Turkish"

Quite so and no disagreement there at all.

You then extrpolated from this the thesis that anytime a TC or TC 'sympathiser' uses the label TRNC or TCCS they are saying that "1/3rd of Cyprus is Turkish" and impled that they are doing so with intent to cause offense (in a way that is comprable to GC/G saying 'Cyprus is Greek'). This extrapolation is ridiculous. It totaly ignore the difference between saying 'part of Cyprus is TC (or GC)' and saying 'part of cyprus is Turkish (or Greek)'. It totaly ignores the intent to cause offense of the person using terms like TRNC and TCCS as lables vs the intent of a person saying 'Cyprus is Greek'. It totaly ignores the reverse argument that could easily be made that if using the term TRNC equals saying that 'part of Cyprus is Turkish' then using the term RoC is equal to saying 'all of Cyprus is Greek (or even GC)'
Further when attempts have been made by me to suggest ways that we can move forward and find ways of referring to the entities that exits in cyprus or might exist in Cyprus in ways that can leave no room for a mistaken interpretation on your part that the person using the lables has the intent of offending GC just by the very use of these lables - you show no interest at all.

So when I point out the flaws in your logic from jumping from saying 'part of Cyprus is Turkish' to the assertion that any use of the terms TRNC or TCCS are the same as saying 'part of Cyprus is Turkish' in both meaning AND intent to cause offensive relative to the intent to cause offense of someone saying 'Cyprus is Greek', how do you respond?

You respond by lecturing me about the 200,000s GC refugees and telling me what I think and what I mean and what my intent is and asking me question like 'do I support the forcing of GC from lands they owned and controlled before 74' and other such general quaestions that you have asked so many times before and to which you already know my answers.

When I offer simple and practical suggestions for how we can 'defuse' and remove the issue (the offensiveness to GC of the labels TRNC and TCCS) you ignore these entirely.

Then you end up with

So you are right, it is not the same. What you say it is much worst

So now I have to ask questions about your INTENT. Is your intent to reasonably discuss what causes offence or might cause offense to GC in the use of certain terms and how we might avoid such offence being percieved in the future so that we can get on and discuss real issues? Or is your intent more about trying to justify/excuse the use of clearly offesnsive statements that have the intent of causing offense like 'Cyprus is Greek' by an argument of '2 wrongs make a right' and even then on the shakiest of logical ground (that using the lable TRNC or TCCS is same as saying 'part of Cyprus is Turkish')? Is your intent more about finding an excuse to start up the tierd and oft rerpeated 'lectures' about TC/T wrongdoing? These are the questions I end up having to ask myself.

[fi]

I think you have all gone out of the topic of this thread.

Fi can I aks that if you have an issue with moderation or lack of it that you do not post such within the thread concerned but PM either a moderator or the admin to discuss it. If you feel that you must raise the issue in public then please do so in the approriate section of the forum - namely the Suggestions and Feedback section. Thank you. Erolz

[Piratis]

So no part of Cyprus is GC?

No, because in Cyprus there are no "parts" but one island that belongs to Cypriots. There is no part that belongs to TCs and a part that belongs to GCs.

Anybody claiming otherwise (that cyprus is not one, but is made of two parts one TC and one GC) is a supported of the nationalist TC position, one of the two positions that led us to problems.

If you do not accept that your homeland can be called GC or Greek and this would be offensive for you, in the same way our homeland which includes Famagusta, Kerynia, Morphou etc, can not be called Turkish or TC.