The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content


21st December 1963

How can we solve it? (keep it civilized)

Postby Oracle » Thu Dec 30, 2010 12:45 am

Original research data please, otherwise don't bother. Nothing like journalists for mudding the waters.

The overall picture doesn't seem too different, anyway. :roll:
Last edited by Oracle on Thu Dec 30, 2010 12:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Oracle
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 23507
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 11:13 am
Location: Anywhere but...

Postby denizaksulu » Thu Dec 30, 2010 12:50 am

Oracle wrote:Original research data please, otherwise don't bother. Nothing like journalists for mudding the waters.


Obviously it does not suit you. You are closer to Israel than I am. You could get to the bottom of this if you so wished, but then why would you prove yourself wrong...again. :lol: (I have a lovely birthmark, but it is no MS). :lol:
User avatar
denizaksulu
Forum Addict
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 36077
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 11:04 am

Postby Daniella » Thu Dec 30, 2010 12:51 am

Oracle wrote:
denizaksulu wrote:
Oracle wrote:
denizaksulu wrote:The Mongolian spot: a study of ethnic differences and a literature review.

Cordova A.
Abstract

Four hundred thirty-seven consecutively born full-term neonates, delivered at Jackson Memorial Hospital, were examined for the presence of mongolian spots (MS). The spots were found in 96% of the Negro children, 46% of the Hispanic children, 9.5% of the Caucasian children, and in both of the Asian children in the series. The sacro-gluteal region was the most frequent site of pigmentation, with the shoulders next in frequency. Almost all the spots on the extremities were located on the extensor surfaces. The color was most frequently blue-green, but was also commonly greenish-blue, blue-gray, or brown. In a concurrent review of 124 newborn records, MS was not described by house officers in any, although the probability of its occurrence would have been approximately 90 cases, based on the results of the study. A comprehensive review of the history of the description of MS and theories of its development, as well as a review of the clinical aspects, is presented.

PMID: 7028354 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Publication Types, MeSH Terms

"The spots were found in 96% of the Negro children"

:? :?

So??????????????


Quite correct. The Mongolian Spots were retained in the population which moved East out of Africa. Lost in the half which moved over Asia Minor and populated Cyprus and up to Greece and then further West.

The Mongolian Spot also is retained in e.g. Japanese and their migrating descendants of the Native American tribes - migrating the other way - further East.

The migratory patterns of humans is proving very interesting and so far confirms recorded history and ethnic boundaries (before recent cleansings).


I thought I read only a couple of weeks ago that the 'East out of Africa' theory was disproved. You must have read it. Have a dig Oracle (if you dont mind).


It isn't wrong.

The tribe came out of Africa and split into two. One went Easterly (you - bearing the spot) and the other went northwards and westerly (us).



Shut up Deniz!
We have an antropologist for free tonight!
Please please lady O do not stop, continue your lesson :lol:
User avatar
Daniella
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1288
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2010 4:35 pm
Location: Milano

Postby Oracle » Thu Dec 30, 2010 12:52 am

denizaksulu wrote:
Oracle wrote:Original research data please, otherwise don't bother. Nothing like journalists for mudding the waters.


Obviously it does not suit you. You are closer to Israel than I am. You could get to the bottom of this if you so wished, but then why would you prove yourself wrong...again. :lol: (I have a lovely birthmark, but it is no MS). :lol:


If you bother to read it, it confirms what I was saying.

Does it say man did not originate in Africa? :roll:
User avatar
Oracle
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 23507
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 11:13 am
Location: Anywhere but...

Postby denizaksulu » Thu Dec 30, 2010 12:58 am

Daniella wrote:
Oracle wrote:
denizaksulu wrote:
Oracle wrote:
denizaksulu wrote:The Mongolian spot: a study of ethnic differences and a literature review.

Cordova A.
Abstract

Four hundred thirty-seven consecutively born full-term neonates, delivered at Jackson Memorial Hospital, were examined for the presence of mongolian spots (MS). The spots were found in 96% of the Negro children, 46% of the Hispanic children, 9.5% of the Caucasian children, and in both of the Asian children in the series. The sacro-gluteal region was the most frequent site of pigmentation, with the shoulders next in frequency. Almost all the spots on the extremities were located on the extensor surfaces. The color was most frequently blue-green, but was also commonly greenish-blue, blue-gray, or brown. In a concurrent review of 124 newborn records, MS was not described by house officers in any, although the probability of its occurrence would have been approximately 90 cases, based on the results of the study. A comprehensive review of the history of the description of MS and theories of its development, as well as a review of the clinical aspects, is presented.

PMID: 7028354 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Publication Types, MeSH Terms

"The spots were found in 96% of the Negro children"

:? :?

So??????????????


Quite correct. The Mongolian Spots were retained in the population which moved East out of Africa. Lost in the half which moved over Asia Minor and populated Cyprus and up to Greece and then further West.

The Mongolian Spot also is retained in e.g. Japanese and their migrating descendants of the Native American tribes - migrating the other way - further East.

The migratory patterns of humans is proving very interesting and so far confirms recorded history and ethnic boundaries (before recent cleansings).


I thought I read only a couple of weeks ago that the 'East out of Africa' theory was disproved. You must have read it. Have a dig Oracle (if you dont mind).


It isn't wrong.

The tribe came out of Africa and split into two. One went Easterly (you - bearing the spot) and the other went northwards and westerly (us).



Shut up Deniz!
We have an antropologist for free tonight!
Please please lady O do not stop, continue your lesson :lol:


:shock: :shock: :shock:

I dont think I can handle this two pronged attack. First Oracle says'shut up your face' and now its Daniella telling me to 'shut up'. :roll:

I think I'd better do some mid-night horse riding along the river to calm me down. :lol: :lol:
User avatar
denizaksulu
Forum Addict
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 36077
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 11:04 am

Postby Piratis » Thu Dec 30, 2010 2:00 am

Afroasiatis wrote:
Piratis wrote:
EU is a union of separate independent countries, it is not a country itself. Cyprus is a country and what we should have in Cyprus is what they have in every other EU country.

Did you really think that a united Cyprus means to brake up Cyprus into two separate independent countries which would then voluntarily be associated with each other in the same way that Portugal and Latvia are associated within EU??


Piratis, this argument (Cyprus is a country, EU isn't) was already used again and again in this thread. It gets boring to me to repeat that I don't care about the legalist aspect of the question, but the practical. EU-countries may be nominally independent, but practically, many if not most of the decisions are taken on an EU-level - and you know with what kind of procedures. You either are against or for these principles - you can't say, I only want them to be applied when it's suitable to me.

Again: democratic principles are for states.

Other bodies or organizations can adopt some of the democratic principles to one level or another, but when we are referring to a Democracy we are reffing to a state, not anything else. EU is not a democracy (but a union of democratic states). UN is not a democracy either. A family can not be a democracy etc.

EU countries are as independent as they want to. Any country can leave the EU if it decides to do so.


By the way, if you think that in every EU-country the principle "one man, one vote" applies 100% at least at the national level, you're not right. I don't know how this is in other countries, but e.g. in Germany, which is a federation, many of the decision have to go through Bundesrat (the Federal Council). Each state is represented there with a number of votes which, again, favors the small states, i.e. the principle "one man, one vote" is violated. You can have a look here, what does this mean exactly for representation of population:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundesrat_of_Germany


Yet again you are mixing apples and oranges.
How many votes does the Turkish minority get in the Bundesrat?

Do you know any country where an 18% minority is equated with the 82% majority, and at the same time smaller minorities are totally excluded?

It is not complicated at all. The Turks are only illegally occupying what belongs to us by over 80%.


Well, and practically everybody with power in the world, including the RoC government, accepts that the major part of what Turkey occupies will be in the future under TC administration. So, it's not as simple as you present it.


Only if we would agree to this. And we will not. Fortunately we rejected the Annan plan, or else north Cyprus would have already been Turkish.

Being a "community" doesn't mean they are not also a minority. They are only the 18% and therefore a minority. Any gains that they received on our expense by collaborating with foreign Imperialists is part of the Cyprus Problem which needs to be resolved with any such gains removed from them.


Your last sentence expresses just a wish, as I understand.

As to if they are a community or a community and minority at the same time, it's more of a game with words, without real meaning. What matters is that they are practically recognized as one of the two consituent communities: similar to the Flemish and Walloons in Belgium, Muslims/Serbs/Croats in Bosnia etc. They aren't a simple minority: that's the difference to Kurds in Turkey (to go back to what Me Ed has mentioned), no matter how we would like it to be ideally.


And this is what solving the Cyprus problem is all about. Making things right. We don't want to make Cyprus another Bosnia, nor Belgium (which is about to brake up).

If making north Cyprus Turkish, legalizing the ethnic cleansing and adopting some racist and undemocratic system that goes against our human rights is called a "solution" for you, then I wonder what you think the problem is.
User avatar
Piratis
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 12261
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 11:08 pm

Postby DTA » Thu Dec 30, 2010 4:19 am

Piratis wrote:
BirKibrisli wrote:Sensible argument will cut no ice with some people,Deniz yegen...

You will just have to accept that once the Greeks touch anything,it will remaing Greek from there to eternity,no matter how and where and for how long history has marched on...It is by divine right..They are the chosen people...Hang on,that was the Jews,werent' they??? Oh,what the hell they can fight it out amongst themselves...We just have to bow to their eternal divine right to own all things they come in contact with... :lol: :lol:


You have the mentally of a thief (and I am not surprised given the kind of culture you grew in)

We didn't merely "touch" Cyprus. We are the vast majority of the population of this island for 1000s of years. And yet you believe that because you illegally occupy north Cyprus for a few years and you ethnically cleansed GCs from north Cyprus, that this makes north Cyprus yours. No mate, this doesn't make north Cyprus yours, it just makes you criminals.


what was the influx of of greeks after the administartion changed from ottoman to English?

Why do you call the italians latins? they were and are Italians (a proud and individual race)

how many Pontiac greeks etc entered cyprus from 74 onwards.

with the declining Tc population due mostly to the GC embargoes in what way would you have combated other than the influx of settlers from Turkey (in your case it would have been from greece).

The Tc do not welcome the the turks from turkey, but this is not because we feel differnt or superior it is because that the recent majority of turks from turkey that decided to come to cyprus were and are turks that have had their passports taken from them because of crimes that they committed in turkey, until recently turks from turkey were still allowed to move to the KKTC just with identity cards (no passport required). Now that this has changed and you will see an influx of welcome new TCs unless you accept a workable BBF.
DTA
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1241
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2010 10:25 pm
Location: LONDON

Postby Piratis » Thu Dec 30, 2010 11:31 am

what was the influx of of greeks after the administartion changed from ottoman to English?

There wasn't any such influx.

Why do you call the italians latins? they were and are Italians (a proud and individual race)


Not all Latins of Cyprus came from Italy. I call them as they call themselves.

how many Pontiac greeks etc entered cyprus from 74 onwards.


Some 1000s. They are a small minority compared to our population. Most importantly they came here legally, and most of them are Greek citizens (who can stay in Cyprus like all other EU citizens) and they were not given the Cypriot citizenship. These people did not vote in the elections or the referendum.

with the declining Tc population due mostly to the GC embargoes in what way would you have combated other than the influx of settlers from Turkey (in your case it would have been from greece).

The Tc do not welcome the the turks from turkey, but this is not because we feel differnt or superior it is because that the recent majority of turks from turkey that decided to come to cyprus were and are turks that have had their passports taken from them because of crimes that they committed in turkey, until recently turks from turkey were still allowed to move to the KKTC just with identity cards (no passport required). Now that this has changed and you will see an influx of welcome new TCs unless you accept a workable BBF.


If what you say is true, then soon the label "Turkish Cypriot" will lose its current meaning since most such people will not be Cypriot at all, but in fact foreigners who entered Cyprus illegally. Is this what you want?

We already said that we will make a huge compromise and accept BBF, although it will be unfair for us. Beyond that it is up to you to accept a BBF that will at the very least respect the human and democratic rights of the Cypriot people, and which will have a proportional distribution of land and coastline of 82%-18%.
User avatar
Piratis
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 12261
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 11:08 pm

Postby Oracle » Thu Dec 30, 2010 11:37 am

DTA wrote:with the declining Tc population due mostly to the GC embargoes


Why are the numbers for Settlers soaring then? Why have the number of Brits increased to being in the several thousands? Is the "embargo" exclusively on TCs that only their population numbers have declined?
User avatar
Oracle
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 23507
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 11:13 am
Location: Anywhere but...

Postby Me Ed » Thu Dec 30, 2010 11:50 am

with the declining Tc population due mostly to the GC embargoes in what way would you have combated other than the influx of settlers from Turkey

The main reason behind the declining TC population has actually more to do with the influx of settlers from Turkey than the embargoes - the realisation that the dream has turned into a nightmare.

After all, how do you square the mass departure of one group because of embargoes with the mass influx of another group in spite of the embargoes?

All that's now left in the north are the TCs that are willing to forfeit their cultural history and identity because those that actually care about it have left before they have been assimilated.
User avatar
Me Ed
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1787
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:24 pm
Location: The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

PreviousNext

Return to Cyprus Problem

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests