Cyprus-Forum.com

[Viewpoint]

antifon check the "RoC" constitution which has the GCs signature on it.

We each have to answer the question for ourselves. You answered it very clearly. Thank you.

And your answer is?

I try to answer it here (scroll down a bit):

http://antifon.blogspot.com/2011/01/tri ... hobia.html

and here

http://antifon.blogspot.com/2010/12/bal ... alone.html

my blog in general:

http://antifon.blogspot.com

Rubbish, do they have a binding international agreement?

[antifon]

antifon check the "RoC" constitution which has the GCs signature on it.

We each have to answer the question for ourselves. You answered it very clearly. Thank you.

And your answer is?

I try to answer it here (scroll down a bit):

http://antifon.blogspot.com/2011/01/tri ... hobia.html

and here

http://antifon.blogspot.com/2010/12/bal ... alone.html

my blog in general:

http://antifon.blogspot.com

Rubbish, do they have a binding international agreement?

They? You mean the Kurds?

[Viewpoint]

antifon check the "RoC" constitution which has the GCs signature on it.

We each have to answer the question for ourselves. You answered it very clearly. Thank you.

And your answer is?

I try to answer it here (scroll down a bit):

http://antifon.blogspot.com/2011/01/tri ... hobia.html

and here

http://antifon.blogspot.com/2010/12/bal ... alone.html

my blog in general:

http://antifon.blogspot.com

Rubbish, do they have a binding international agreement?

They? You mean the Kurds?

No the martians of course the Kurds.

[antifon]

antifon check the "RoC" constitution which has the GCs signature on it.

We each have to answer the question for ourselves. You answered it very clearly. Thank you.

And your answer is?

I try to answer it here (scroll down a bit):

http://antifon.blogspot.com/2011/01/tri ... hobia.html

and here

http://antifon.blogspot.com/2010/12/bal ... alone.html

my blog in general:

http://antifon.blogspot.com

Rubbish, do they have a binding international agreement?

They? You mean the Kurds?

No the martians of course the Kurds.

I believe you will find your answer here:
http://www.kurdistan.org/work/speeches/ ... f-liberty/

You will especially enjoy this part:

Ataturk, whose name means father of Turks in Turkish — a man who thought highly of himself and accepted the title without a blush and insisted that the children of Kurds call him their father too ó one day asked Hasan Hayri to wear his traditional Kurdish attire to the Assembly and address its members on the topic of unity between the Kurds and the Turks. He did. The event was noted by the foreign dignitaries who were intently following the pronouncements of the Kurdish leaders for signs of comity between the two peoples of the new republic. A few days later, Ataturk asked him to send a telegraph to Lord Curzon, the chief European negotiator in Lausanne, to express his support for the position of the Kurdish emissary, Ismet Inonu, who was insisting that the Kurds did not want a country and were rather happy to be with the Turks in newly declared republic. That too was done.

But after the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne and the acceptance of Turkey into the community of nations, Ataturk’s cronies arrested Hasan Hayri and accused him of treason. He was charged with engaging in blatant Kurdish nationalism for wearing Kurdish clothes. He protested by saying that Ataturk had asked him to wear them. His objections were of no avail. Hasan Hayri was condemned to death by hanging. As is customary in places where this act is still in practice, he was asked to state his last wishes. Hasan Hayri had finally learned the lesson of his life. But it was too late. He told the Turkish scribbler to write, “I want my grave to be in a place where the Kurds can walk by and spit on me because of my betrayal of them.”

You will also my argumentation here:
http://antifon.blogspot.com/2010/12/new ... -late.html

[insan]

antifon check the "RoC" constitution which has the GCs signature on it.

We each have to answer the question for ourselves. You answered it very clearly. Thank you.

And your answer is?

I try to answer it here (scroll down a bit):

http://antifon.blogspot.com/2011/01/tri ... hobia.html

and here

http://antifon.blogspot.com/2010/12/bal ... alone.html

my blog in general:

http://antifon.blogspot.com

Rubbish, do they have a binding international agreement?

They? You mean the Kurds?

No the martians of course the Kurds.

I believe you will find your answer here:
http://www.kurdistan.org/work/speeches/ ... f-liberty/

You will especially enjoy this part:

Ataturk, whose name means father of Turks in Turkish — a man who thought highly of himself and accepted the title without a blush and insisted that the children of Kurds call him their father too ó one day asked Hasan Hayri to wear his traditional Kurdish attire to the Assembly and address its members on the topic of unity between the Kurds and the Turks. He did. The event was noted by the foreign dignitaries who were intently following the pronouncements of the Kurdish leaders for signs of comity between the two peoples of the new republic. A few days later, Ataturk asked him to send a telegraph to Lord Curzon, the chief European negotiator in Lausanne, to express his support for the position of the Kurdish emissary, Ismet Inonu, who was insisting that the Kurds did not want a country and were rather happy to be with the Turks in newly declared republic. That too was done.

But after the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne and the acceptance of Turkey into the community of nations, Ataturk’s cronies arrested Hasan Hayri and accused him of treason. He was charged with engaging in blatant Kurdish nationalism for wearing Kurdish clothes. He protested by saying that Ataturk had asked him to wear them. His objections were of no avail. Hasan Hayri was condemned to death by hanging. As is customary in places where this act is still in practice, he was asked to state his last wishes. Hasan Hayri had finally learned the lesson of his life. But it was too late. He told the Turkish scribbler to write, “I want my grave to be in a place where the Kurds can walk by and spit on me because of my betrayal of them.”

You will also my argumentation here:
http://antifon.blogspot.com/2010/12/new ... -late.html

Atatürk had done his best to please the leaderships of various Kurdish groups but they either refused what was offered by Ataturk or asked something different...

Yes, Atatürk had done his best for them against the all odds under then the circumstances... especially the pressure from a very influential group of "Young Turks"...

MEQ: If Atatürk were alive today, what do you suppose he would do to solve the Kurdish
problem? Andrew Mango, a British historian writing a biography of Atatürk, says he would allow some local government and expression for Kurds while seeking to keep them under the Turkish roof.

Öcalan: We have two Atatürks, the one before and after 1925. Before 1925, Atatürk took a more positive attitude towards the Kurds. But after that date, he began a very negative policy. If Atatürk were alive today, however, he would not act like the Turkish leaders are now. He would see the bankrupt result of his policy and change it. I agree that if Atatürk were alive today, he would change Turkey's policy.

http://www.meforum.org/399/abdullah-oca ... everywhere

http://www.kdp6.info/english/news/392.html

[antifon]

antifon check the "RoC" constitution which has the GCs signature on it.

We each have to answer the question for ourselves. You answered it very clearly. Thank you.

And your answer is?

I try to answer it here (scroll down a bit):

http://antifon.blogspot.com/2011/01/tri ... hobia.html

and here

http://antifon.blogspot.com/2010/12/bal ... alone.html

my blog in general:

http://antifon.blogspot.com

Rubbish, do they have a binding international agreement?

They? You mean the Kurds?

No the martians of course the Kurds.

I believe you will find your answer here:
http://www.kurdistan.org/work/speeches/ ... f-liberty/

You will especially enjoy this part:

Ataturk, whose name means father of Turks in Turkish — a man who thought highly of himself and accepted the title without a blush and insisted that the children of Kurds call him their father too ó one day asked Hasan Hayri to wear his traditional Kurdish attire to the Assembly and address its members on the topic of unity between the Kurds and the Turks. He did. The event was noted by the foreign dignitaries who were intently following the pronouncements of the Kurdish leaders for signs of comity between the two peoples of the new republic. A few days later, Ataturk asked him to send a telegraph to Lord Curzon, the chief European negotiator in Lausanne, to express his support for the position of the Kurdish emissary, Ismet Inonu, who was insisting that the Kurds did not want a country and were rather happy to be with the Turks in newly declared republic. That too was done.

But after the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne and the acceptance of Turkey into the community of nations, Ataturk’s cronies arrested Hasan Hayri and accused him of treason. He was charged with engaging in blatant Kurdish nationalism for wearing Kurdish clothes. He protested by saying that Ataturk had asked him to wear them. His objections were of no avail. Hasan Hayri was condemned to death by hanging. As is customary in places where this act is still in practice, he was asked to state his last wishes. Hasan Hayri had finally learned the lesson of his life. But it was too late. He told the Turkish scribbler to write, “I want my grave to be in a place where the Kurds can walk by and spit on me because of my betrayal of them.”

You will also my argumentation here:
http://antifon.blogspot.com/2010/12/new ... -late.html

Atatürk had done his best to please the leaderships of various Kurdish groups but they either refused what was offered by Ataturk or asked something different...

Yes, Atatürk had done his best for them against the all odds under then the circumstances... especially the pressure from a very influential group of "Young Turks"...

MEQ: If Atatürk were alive today, what do you suppose he would do to solve the Kurdish
problem? Andrew Mango, a British historian writing a biography of Atatürk, says he would allow some local government and expression for Kurds while seeking to keep them under the Turkish roof.

Öcalan: We have two Atatürks, the one before and after 1925. Before 1925, Atatürk took a more positive attitude towards the Kurds. But after that date, he began a very negative policy. If Atatürk were alive today, however, he would not act like the Turkish leaders are now. He would see the bankrupt result of his policy and change it. I agree that if Atatürk were alive today, he would change Turkey's policy.

http://www.meforum.org/399/abdullah-oca ... everywhere

http://www.kdp6.info/english/news/392.html

TMT was Cyprus' PKK I guess!

http://antifon.blogspot.com/2010/12/new ... -late.html

[DT.]

antifon check the "RoC" constitution which has the GCs signature on it.

We each have to answer the question for ourselves. You answered it very clearly. Thank you.

And your answer is?

I try to answer it here (scroll down a bit):

http://antifon.blogspot.com/2011/01/tri ... hobia.html

and here

http://antifon.blogspot.com/2010/12/bal ... alone.html

my blog in general:

http://antifon.blogspot.com

Rubbish, do they have a binding international agreement?

What like the Ankara Protocol? Oh! I know! How about the one which says it gaurantees Cypriot sovereignty!

[insan]

antifon check the "RoC" constitution which has the GCs signature on it.

We each have to answer the question for ourselves. You answered it very clearly. Thank you.

And your answer is?

I try to answer it here (scroll down a bit):

http://antifon.blogspot.com/2011/01/tri ... hobia.html

and here

http://antifon.blogspot.com/2010/12/bal ... alone.html

my blog in general:

http://antifon.blogspot.com

Rubbish, do they have a binding international agreement?

They? You mean the Kurds?

No the martians of course the Kurds.

I believe you will find your answer here:
http://www.kurdistan.org/work/speeches/ ... f-liberty/

You will especially enjoy this part:

Ataturk, whose name means father of Turks in Turkish — a man who thought highly of himself and accepted the title without a blush and insisted that the children of Kurds call him their father too ó one day asked Hasan Hayri to wear his traditional Kurdish attire to the Assembly and address its members on the topic of unity between the Kurds and the Turks. He did. The event was noted by the foreign dignitaries who were intently following the pronouncements of the Kurdish leaders for signs of comity between the two peoples of the new republic. A few days later, Ataturk asked him to send a telegraph to Lord Curzon, the chief European negotiator in Lausanne, to express his support for the position of the Kurdish emissary, Ismet Inonu, who was insisting that the Kurds did not want a country and were rather happy to be with the Turks in newly declared republic. That too was done.

But after the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne and the acceptance of Turkey into the community of nations, Ataturk’s cronies arrested Hasan Hayri and accused him of treason. He was charged with engaging in blatant Kurdish nationalism for wearing Kurdish clothes. He protested by saying that Ataturk had asked him to wear them. His objections were of no avail. Hasan Hayri was condemned to death by hanging. As is customary in places where this act is still in practice, he was asked to state his last wishes. Hasan Hayri had finally learned the lesson of his life. But it was too late. He told the Turkish scribbler to write, “I want my grave to be in a place where the Kurds can walk by and spit on me because of my betrayal of them.”

You will also my argumentation here:
http://antifon.blogspot.com/2010/12/new ... -late.html

Atatürk had done his best to please the leaderships of various Kurdish groups but they either refused what was offered by Ataturk or asked something different...

Yes, Atatürk had done his best for them against the all odds under then the circumstances... especially the pressure from a very influential group of "Young Turks"...

MEQ: If Atatürk were alive today, what do you suppose he would do to solve the Kurdish
problem? Andrew Mango, a British historian writing a biography of Atatürk, says he would allow some local government and expression for Kurds while seeking to keep them under the Turkish roof.

Öcalan: We have two Atatürks, the one before and after 1925. Before 1925, Atatürk took a more positive attitude towards the Kurds. But after that date, he began a very negative policy. If Atatürk were alive today, however, he would not act like the Turkish leaders are now. He would see the bankrupt result of his policy and change it. I agree that if Atatürk were alive today, he would change Turkey's policy.

http://www.meforum.org/399/abdullah-oca ... everywhere

http://www.kdp6.info/english/news/392.html

TMT was Cyprus' PKK I guess!

http://antifon.blogspot.com/2010/12/new ... -late.html

From a Greek or GC point of view, yes... and that's why u r not sure about whether u r a hypocrite or not...

[merrytraveller]

No I don't think that you are a hypocrite; you are just frustrated and confused, like me and a lot of others.

[antifon]

No I don't think that you are a hypocrite; you are just frustrated and confused, like me and a lot of others.

See what frustration leads people to do?
Let me know what you think.

http://antifon.blogspot.com