Cyprus-Forum.com

[kimon07]

What was Georgadjis's visit for Greece for? Any ideas

Who did he meet and what did he ask for?

I know that at some point after the establishment of the RoC the CY government informed the Greek government that the TMT had was supplied by Turkey with about 10.000 weapons including heavy machine guns, mortars, anti tank etc, and was preparing for an insurgency. At that time the Greek Cypriot side had only about 700 crap rifles, sub machine guns etc which had been used by EOKA during the struggle. The RoC asked the Greek government for weapons but the Greek government declined. (See my link in the thread "the Bloody truth about Cyprus".

Maybe this is the meeting you are referring to? If not, would you like to enlighten us please? with links please? Not like when you mentioned vaguely Aphrodite I, II and III but never produced any facts about them? OK?

[CBBB]

What were the 50 constituencies than? do you have the list and the results in each one?

No I don't. Also saying that the Patriotic Front got around the same as AKEL is wrong, the Patriotic Front got 56.1% and AKEL got 35%.

[kimon07]

What were the 50 constituencies than? do you have the list and the results in each one?

Maybe YOU do 007?? If you have the answers to your questions why the mystery?

[kimon07]

As there is so much cloud over who did what and so little information of the history books regarding Cyprus History between 1959 and 1974, perhaps we can clarify and get to the root of it all.......

If you take some time to read the book below, you will get all your answers and the answers of the GC side to all the accusations and the propaganda of the turkish side in relation to the Cyprus Conflict. You will thus save us the trouble to repeat ourselves over and over again.

Let's start with my post of Jan 2012.

by kimon07 » Sat Jan 28, 2012 3:29 am
The book that painstakingly exposes Turkish and British propaganda from 1955 to 1974.

The book is both in Greek and in English. Enjoy it.

We continue with the links:

1. Book essay: The Bloody Truth about Cyprus
http://europenews.dk/en/node/42657

2. The Book in PDF:
English text after page 203.
http://cyprusactionnetwork.org/yahoo_si ... 130049.pdf

Now to a big part of the essay:
Have fun.

EuropeNews 28 April 2011
Bloody truth, Nicosia, March 2009. ISBN 9789963962204
By Henrik R. Clausen

The apparently endless stalemate on Cyprus is getting a thorough treatment in the publication by the organization “Freedom and Justice for Cyprus”.
While the documentation of what went down through the 1960's and 1970's is shocking and brutal, the real coup of the book is that it goes back to the 1950's, once and for all settling the question of who originally created the conflict in Cyprus: It wasn't the 'Turkish' Cypriots. Nor was it Turkey. It was, documentably, Great Britain.
The book has a cover as brutal as the title, an image of Cyprus with blood dripping from the north into the southern part. Based on this, one might expect it to contain a vitriolic anti-Turkish diatribe, but this isn't really the case. In spite of some linguistic excesses, such as the phrase “The Turkish Propaganda Machine”, the book in general sticks to the documentation of events and developments on the ground, and thus becomes a valuable resource for understanding the current stalemate, as well as for assessing the merits of various proposed solutions.
As for who sowed the seeds of the current problems, the book is clear: It was not Turkey, nor Turkish Cypriots, it was Great Britain. Seeking a way to maintain the colonial rule established in 1923, Britain feared a united Cypriot opposition to their rule, and gradually worked to strengthen the Muslim/Turkish identity of the Muslim Cypriots. That included construction of new mosques in villages without one, initiating using the term “Turkish Cypriots”, and later requesting Turkey to reclaim rule of the island, an idea initially received with disinterest by the Turkish government.
However, a committee on the subject was formed in July 1955, and in 1956, professor Nihat Erim was appointed special advisory on the Cyprus issue. In November and December 1956, he released two reports endorsing an active Turkish engagement in Cyprus, aiming first at a division of the island into Greek and Turkish parts (termed “Taksin”), and to work long-term for a full Turkish takeover. This policy was adopted by the Turkish government, and has been followed by various Turkish governments – civilian or military – since then.
The book details chronology of various Greek and Turkish groups formed in the late 1950's, including EOKA (Greek), VOLCAN (Turkish) and TMT (Turkish). Their chronology is particular important, for it is useful in weeding out honest statements from deceitful ones. This includes Turkish statements about the “Bloodthirsty Makarios”, the work by Rauf Denktash to turn TMT into an underground Turkish, the killing of other Turkish voices than those of TMT, and the efforts to make Turkish Cypriots to segregate themselves from the Greek Cypriots. The tacit approval of the British in this marks a low point of harmful colonial divide-and-rule strategies.
Descriptions of events after 1962 are somewhat more sketchy. The proposed constitutional changes in 1963 play a central role, and the efforts by the TMT to segregate the Greek and Turkish are recorded in a very varied degree of detail. The Turkish bombardment of Tylleria in August 1964 is mentioned, but the heavy fighting in the preceding months are not. Advance references to the 2004 Annan Plan and similar chronological leaps are annoying, in spite of their relevance. The 1974 invasion is likewise accounted for in an unsystematic way, jumping rapidly from overall descriptions to individual tales of mass rapes and executions by the Turkish soldiers.
The real strength of this book is the wealth of original sources – British, Cypriot, Turkish – drawn in and quoted here. Many common fallacies and outright lies are dismantled, and for this reason it is easy to forgive the somewhat uneven narrative of the book. Harder to forgive is the lack of illustrations. Some maps proving overview of violent incidents and the 1974 invasion would be welcome, as would some tables with statistics.
This book provides essential background information for the situation in Cyprus. It has its strength in quoting vital original documents in their proper context, showing a clear route from British colonial machinations to direct Turkish involvement, and provides an indispensable understanding of many key events. On the other hand, it is jumpy, both chronologically and emotionally, clearly one-sided, and skips chunks of history needed for a full account of the developments.
Review opinion: 4/6
If you have interest in the Cyprus conflict, adding this book to your collection is recommended, in particular because it provides crucial information regarding the role played by the British.
For those interested, more details out of “Bloody Truth”, and some closing comments:
In 1878, Cyprus was ceded from Ottoman to British rule, initially as a long-term lease agreement. The Cypriots, being ruled by the Ottomans since 1571, welcomed the change, rejoicing in a European power coming back to Cyprus, setting the hopes for eventually establishing a modern, independent Cypriot state, much as countries in the Balkans during the 19th century had cast off centuries of brutal Ottoman rule and restored their independence.
Independence and self-determination was not in the cards for Cyprus, however. Even after World War I, where the Wilsonian Principles of self-determination of the peoples led to dismantling of empires and the re-establishment of multiple nation-states, Cyprus was not one of the states to return to independence. Rather, it became a British crown colony in 1925, after Turkey in the Treaty of Lausanne had relinquished all interests in the island.
Maintaining colonial rule was growing increasingly difficult, however, and not least in a country that considered itself part of the Western civilization, the Greek in particular. Great Britain set out to do what it had done so successfully elsewhere, to divide and rule. Strengthening the Islamic identity of the Muslims in Cyprus was deemed essential to this, and to do so, Britain initiated construction of mosques in many villages that had never had one.
Opening the door for Turkey
Then [BT: Page 208], on June 8th 1949 came a note in the minority newspaper “Halkni Sesi”: It reported that the British Governor R. E. Turnbull requested the term “Muslims of Cyprus” to be replaced with the currently used “Turkish Cypriots”. This seemingly insignificant change of terms in time brought about a change in perception, that the Muslims in Cyprus were Turks, and thus that Turkish interference on the island represented a legitimate concern for Turkish citizens.
But that was hard work. As Turkish foreign minister Ali Kuprulu said in 1950:
“For Turkey, there does not exist any Cyprus issue”.
Only in 1954, when Archbishop Makarios with the aid of Greece got Cyprus on the agenda of the United Nations, did the British press and help Turkey sufficient that a Turkish demand to gain control of Cyprus could be raised at the United Nations. This is related in chilling detail on pages 208 through 213, and since the long-term consequences of these machinations are well known, it stands as a sinister example of how to cause severe long-term damage in international relations.
Taking the opportunity
For Turkey was not late in spotting an opportunity to increase regional influence and gain an advance strategic stronghold south of Turkey proper. In 1956, Turkish Prime minister Menderes set out to investigate the potential of getting a foothold in Cyprus. Professor Nihat Erim endorsed the idea, which has remained official Turkish policy since. The aim was to first provoke an ethnic division (Taksin) of Cyprus, then in the long term aim to take over the island entirely.
Turkey didn't miss the opportunity offered to them by the British, having no particular interest in upholding international law in the process.
Taking up arms
On pages 214 through 231, we get quite a bit of detail about the increasing use (and misuse) of weapons and violence, in particular the formation of the Turkish orgs VOLKAN and TMT. Simultaneously, the armed movement EOKA was formed to dislodge the British colonial rule and replace it with a free and democratic Cypriot state. The story of this struggle is related elsewhere, but it clearly strengthened the British resolve to invite Turkish involvement in Cyprus, for it is much easier to rule over a divided people than a unified one. Thus Britain made Turkey partner in all formal proceedings, and turned a blind eye to Turkey creating a paramilitary organization TMT, 10,000 members strong, discreetly armed from Turkey and led by retired Turkish military staff.
Also elsewhere violent acts took place. On September 6th 1955, a minor bomb went off at the house where Kemal Atatürk was born, and on that pretext, along with pressure from the Turkish group “Cyprus is Turkish”, the Greek quarters of Istanbul (previously Constantinople) was severely damaged and looted, leading eventually to further ethnic cleansing of the Greek minority there.
The underground army TMT were to play a pivotal role in the following years. The predecessor, VOLKAN, had been partly British directed, but under the excellent leadership of Rauf Denktash, things slipped out of British control to the radical Turkish-supported circle around TMT. With this group systematically killing off Turkish-Cypriot dissent from their radical agenda, including labor union leaders, journalists and others of the opinion that peaceful coexistence between all Cypriots was a preferable option. Thus, TMT and Rauf Denktash managed to establish themselves as the only major voice of the Muslim / Turkish Cypriots. Not exactly democratic, but effective.
Winding up
After the semi-independence of 1960, the book becomes more spotty and could well have covered the events much more systematically. It does, however, bring out a valuable series of mythbusting, including the so-called “Bathtub murders” in 1963, the bombing of the Bayraktar mosque in Nicosia, the burning of a mosque in 1974, and other incidents staged to escalate Greek-Turkish animosity in ways similar to bombing the birthplace of Kemal Atatürk, then blaming the Greeks.
The pattern of Turks staging a (minor) event, or exploiting an unrelated crime for propaganda purposes, has been revealed bit by bit many years after they had the desired effect on the ground. Here, for instance, is a report from Today's Zaman touching on several key events staged by Turkish parts in the conflict.

[bill cobbett]

Have you got the next bit please Kimon?... the bit that comes after this, the Zaman report..???

The pattern of Turks staging a (minor) event, or exploiting an unrelated crime for propaganda purposes, has been revealed bit by bit many years after they had the desired effect on the ground. Here, for instance, is a report from Today's Zaman touching on several key events staged by Turkish parts in the conflict.

???

[kimon07]

Have you got the next bit please Kimon?... the bit that comes after this, the Zaman report..???

The pattern of Turks staging a (minor) event, or exploiting an unrelated crime for propaganda purposes, has been revealed bit by bit many years after they had the desired effect on the ground. Here, for instance, is a report from Today's Zaman touching on several key events staged by Turkish parts in the conflict.

???

Ill look for it.

[kimon07]

Have you got the next bit please Kimon?... the bit that comes after this, the Zaman report..???

The pattern of Turks staging a (minor) event, or exploiting an unrelated crime for propaganda purposes, has been revealed bit by bit many years after they had the desired effect on the ground. Here, for instance, is a report from Today's Zaman touching on several key events staged by Turkish parts in the conflict.???

The link to it is embeded in the essay. By the way, I did not quote the whole of the essay but just most of it. The part I didn't quote is very interesting also as it deals with even the Annan Plan.

Turkey remembers mosque bombings after general’s confession
25 September 2010 / TODAY’S ZAMAN, İSTANBUL

http://www.todayszaman.com/news-222633- ... ssion.html


The bombing of two mosques in the Turkish part of Cyprus in 1962 might have been carried out by Turkish Armed Forces, revealed a retired general who inadvertently confessed to ordering the burning of a mosque as part of psychological warfare operations in 1974.
In remarks published by Haber Türk daily on Wednesday, Gen. Sabri Yirmibeşoğlu, who led the Special War Department in 1971 and also worked to mobilize civilian resistance during Turkey's military intervention on Cyprus in 1974, said: “In Special War, certain acts of sabotage are staged and blamed on the enemy to increase public resistance.
We did this on Cyprus; we even burnt down a mosque.” In response to the surprised correspondent’s incredulous look the general said, “I am giving an example,” in an attempt to clear things up.
In the interview with Habertürk Yirmibeşoğlu was responding to allegations from Ahmet Özal, son of Turkey’s 8th President Turgut Özal, that Yirmibeşoğlu was behind a failed assassination attempt on his father’s life.
The Taraf daily in an attempt to guess what mosque this could have been, remember the 1962 bombing of the Bayraktar and Ömeriye mosques. Both mosques were very important to Turkish Cypriots. The Bayraktar mosque’s minaret was severely damaged in the explosion and a shrine of Bayraktar -- the flag bearer who died during Cyprus’ conquering by the Ottomans in 1570 – was also damaged.
The incident had caused major outrage at the time. The Greeks had denied any involvement, with the Greek Cypriot Interior Ministry releasing a statement that accused the Turks fort he bombings.
Meanwhile, there were also two journalists Ahmet Muzaffer Gürkan (38) and Ayhan Hikmet (35) who shared the suspicion. Their newspaper wrote about the controversy on the front page. In its Apr. 23 1962 issue, the newspaper said they would announce the real perpetrator of the bombings. Both men were killed on the same day. Gürkan was killed around 8.30 pm with an automatic weapon as he entered his house. Ayhan Hikmet was killed the same night after midnight with a hunting rifle in his bed right before his wife.
In 2005, Hıfsiye Hikmet – the daughter of Ayhan Hikmet – told Turkish Cypriot journalist Sevgül Uludağ that she had no doubts that her father was killed by a Turk. “They killed him so he wouldn’t be able to disclose who bombed the mosque. They said they would announce it in their new issue.” She also said as a child she remembered family elders talking about her father’s killer being Turkish and not Greek.
Meanwhile, the founding president of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) Rauf Denktaş said that EOKA member Yorgacis had claimed to have evidence that can prove that the bomb was detonated by Turks. He said a cross investigation was started, but there was no evidence indicating that Turkish soldiers planted the bomb.
The retired general and the Special War Department unit he led are s also believed to have wide-ranging information concerning many alleged crimes and activities of behind-the-scene organizations such as JİTEM. This unit and Yirmibeşoğlu are implicated in the Sept. 6-7, 1955 pogrom in İstanbul against minorities, which today is widely believed to have been part of a manipulative plan concocted by Ergenekon-like structures.
Yirmibeşoğlu has admitted that the Sept. 6-7 events were organized by the Special War Department, documented by journalist Fatih Güllapoğlu in his book “Operation with No Tanks or Arms.” In the book, Yirmibeşoğlu is quoted as saying, “Sept. 6-7 is the work of Special War [department], and it is a spectacular organization.” However, he later denied this.
The Turkish Armed Forces’ Special War Department is also believed to be responsible for Turkey’s Bloody Mayday, when 34 died after unknown assailants opened fire on large crowds celebrating Labor Day in the Taksim Square. The 1978 Maraş and 1980 Çorum pogroms against Alevis in these towns are also believed to be the work of this unit. The Sivas massacre of 1993 July 12 – when 36 writers visiting Sivas with atheist writer Aziz Nesin were burnt to death in their hotel by an angry religious fundamentalist mob – is also believed to have been organized by the Special War Department or other similar units inside the military.
A document seized in an Ergenekon related investigation that was also included in the indictment sheds light to the workings of the Special Warp Department. The report, drafted by members of the military plotting to coup d’état, says that some fake operations should be staged in order to keep the people on the “resistance” front. The document is now included as evidence in the indictment against some naval officers who stand accused of having plotted to assassinate two admirals.

[Lordo]

I am so glad you brought the subject of the two mosques up my friend.

Now you boys love Kavazoglu and Dr Ihsan Ali right?

Have you read his memoirs? Especially the section where he says he has heard from reliable sources that both the mosques and the two Lawyers were killed by Mr Logodontis. Now than, who was Logodontis working for? Makarios or Georgadjis.

You should not pay too much attention to a General who is trying to get out of a jam by saying anything to detract attention from his real crimes.

[Lordo]

When it comes to the events of 21st of December, who exactly killed Zeki Halil and Cemalie Emirali again. I hear you say it was clear who did it?

Sure how many witnesses did the RoC police talk to for any information. What about the 8 otehr occupants that were in the car at the time? Perhaps they may have some information regarding that night?

How many witness statements were taken?

What about our famous footballer called Yanni who played for Olympiacos Football Club in Nicosia. Was he ever asked what the hell he was doing in the middle of the night armed with a machine gun stopping people and shooting them dead. Who gave him the authority to carry guns, was he a policeman?

[Bananiot]

Actually its Lagodontis, a most corrupt police officer. What memoirs are you referring to Lordo. Can you refer me to the exact text that mentions Lagodontis?