Cyprus-Forum.com

[Maximus]

Genocide......

(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

There was no TC genocide but there was a Greek and Armenian genocide that the Turks committed and responsible for. The Turks also physical destructed the northern third of Cyprus and cleansed the land of the natives.

So, Turkey is guilty of (a) (b) (c) and (e) and the TC's were accomplices in this Genocide as far as the case of Cyprus is concerned.

Is their a minimum death toll required?

Your just an outrageous moron trying to fit the story's and propaganda of your imams into a definition of Genocide. In fact, what the Turks and the TC's did in Cyprus (as well as in Anatolia over the centuries) to the GC's fits the definition of Genocide near perfectly.

[Viewpoint]

Genocide......

(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

There was no TC genocide but there was a Greek and Armenian genocide that the Turks committed and responsible for. The Turks also physical destructed the northern third of Cyprus and cleansed the land of the natives.

So, Turkey is guilty of (a) (b) (c) and (e) and the TC's were accomplices in this Genocide as far as the case of Cyprus is concerned.

Is their a minimum death toll required?

Your just an outrageous moron trying to fit the story's and propaganda of your imams into a definition of Genocide. In fact, what the Turks and the TC's did in Cyprus (as well as in Anatolia over the centuries) to the GC's fits the definition of Genocide near perfectly.

You are panicing, nowhere does it say there is a minimum, intent is the deciding factor and the GCs always wanted to rid the island of its TC population either by death or making them leave the island by every trick in the book.

[Maximus]

Genocide......

(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

There was no TC genocide but there was a Greek and Armenian genocide that the Turks committed and responsible for. The Turks also physical destructed the northern third of Cyprus and cleansed the land of the natives.

So, Turkey is guilty of (a) (b) (c) and (e) and the TC's were accomplices in this Genocide as far as the case of Cyprus is concerned.

Is their a minimum death toll required?

Your just an outrageous moron trying to fit the story's and propaganda of your imams into a definition of Genocide. In fact, what the Turks and the TC's did in Cyprus (as well as in Anatolia over the centuries) to the GC's fits the definition of Genocide near perfectly.

You are panicing, nowhere does it say there is a minimum, intent is the deciding factor and the GCs always wanted to rid the island of its TC population either by death or making them leave the island by every trick in the book.

YOU posted this definition of 'Genocide'. If you wanted to rig it to swing the argument your way, why didn't you just make up your own definition of the word genocide, like you are trying to do now? why didn't you just post;

(F) there is no minimum death toll
(G) VP's perception of GC's intent is the deciding factor if it is a genocide or not

and exclude (a) through to (e). This would have been much easier for your single celled brain to process and understand.

You simply have not got a clue what you are talking about.

Its was the Turks and the TC's who committed the genocide in Cyprus. This thread is nothing but a reactionary and twisted piece of crap in response to this one : cyprus41055.html

[repulsewarrior]

Genocide......

(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

...my point exactly. it would seem to me that if Turkish Cypriots wanted too, they could sue/charge Turkey for crimes of genocide, by this Article.

[Demonax]

You are panicing, nowhere does it say there is a minimum, intent is the deciding factor and the GCs always wanted to rid the island of its TC population either by death or making them leave the island by every trick in the book.

In the six years prior to the Turkish invasion there were THREE TCs officially killed in intercommunal incidents in Cyprus. Around 25 according to TC 'sources' but these cannot be verified. By any stretch of the imagination this is not evidence of an 'intent' to commit a ‘genocide’.

In fact, from 1968 the intercommunal violence had more or less ceased and the leadership of both sides were engaged in discussions for a constitutional settlement. Some TCs had started to return to their villages and the two sides were even doing business with each other - despite the pressure on TCs by the TMT terrorists to remain in their enclaves and not to do business with Greek Cypriots.

You are quick to accept Turkish claims that it invaded Cyprus to prevent a hypothetical attack on Turkish Cypriots - when in reality the only systematic large-scale orchestrated action in Cyprus which can be termed a crime against humanity is the mass rapes, thousands killed and the ethnic cleansing carried out against 200,000 Greek Cypriots by the Turkish army in 1974.

[Viewpoint]

You are panicing, nowhere does it say there is a minimum, intent is the deciding factor and the GCs always wanted to rid the island of its TC population either by death or making them leave the island by every trick in the book.

In the six years prior to the Turkish invasion there were THREE TCs officially killed in intercommunal incidents in Cyprus. Around 25 according to TC 'sources' but these cannot be verified. By any stretch of the imagination this is not evidence of an 'intent' to commit a ‘genocide’.

In fact, from 1968 the intercommunal violence had more or less ceased and the leadership of both sides were engaged in discussions for a constitutional settlement. Some TCs had started to return to their villages and the two sides were even doing business with each other - despite the pressure on TCs by the TMT terrorists to remain in their enclaves and not to do business with Greek Cypriots.

You are quick to accept Turkish claims that it invaded Cyprus to prevent a hypothetical attack on Turkish Cypriots - when in reality the only systematic large-scale orchestrated action in Cyprus which can be termed a crime against humanity is the mass rapes, thousands killed and the ethnic cleansing carried out against 200,000 Greek Cypriots by the Turkish army in 1974.

You threw your own people at risk when you disregarded the Tcs and pushed them into enclaves, you threw your people at risk when you taunted the Tcs and Turkey claiming they do not have the balls to intervene, you throw your people into risk the day you dreamed of enosis, you threw your people into risk when you killed innocent people, you threw your people into risk when you killed Turkish Soldiers land on the beaches.....you should answer to your people for not protecting them and the crimes you have commited against the people of Cyprus.

[Demonax]

you threw your people into risk when you killed innocent people, you threw your people into risk when you killed Turkish Soldiers land on the beaches....

Are you not paying attention? THREE TCs were officially killed in intercommunal incidents, around 25 according to your own unverified sources, in the entire SIX years prior to the Turkish invasion of 1974!

You are now reduced to arguing that in 1974 Greek Cypriot men, women and children deserved to be killed, hundreds of thousands forcibly expelled from their homes and the island partitioned, because Greek Cypriots had the audacity not to welcome the invading Turkish army!

Your stupidity has just reached a new level. Aren't you embarrassed writing this drivel? Perhaps you need to take a break from this forum, VP.

[Flying Horse]

THREE TCs were officially killed in intercommunal incidents, around 25 according to your own unverified sources, in the entire SIX years prior to the Turkish invasion of 1974!

Not being funny here, but that's not a right lot...I reckon theres been more deaths by a racial/gang nature where I live in a lesser time span.......

If those are official numbers above, then can it really be called Genocide? I'd be more inclined to think it would be more of an example above, and 'genocide' be a much more blown out of proportion title. Wouldn't it be more on the lines of rogue racial killings?

Now, if of course the numbers were far, far higher ie around 1650 or so if not more(as in the numbers of GCs missing).....then surely that is correctly thought of as 'genocide'?


We can all find evidence of official recorded deaths or missing people that are Greek Cypriot, but can someone be so kind as to point me in the right direction of official Turkish Cypriot recorded deaths/missing?

[bill cobbett]

Boys and girls...

If we are to talk about Genocides, Crimes against Humanity etc etc...

The relevant body and international treaty for these crimes are the International Criminal Court with the authority of the Rome Statute.

The Republic of CY has both signed and ratified the Rome Statute.

We won't be surprised to learn that the Republic of Turkey has not signed the Treaty. (That's not to say that it and its nationals are out of reach)

In any event, the Court's jurisdiction only covers events post-2002.... UNLESS the contracting parties or other states lay aside this time limit.

This is what the Court says about its jurisdiction...

..."The Court does not have universal jurisdiction. The Court may only exercise jurisdiction if:

The accused is a national of a State Party or a State otherwise accepting the jurisdiction of the Court;

The crime took place on the territory of a State Party or a State otherwise accepting the jurisdiction of the Court; or

The United Nations Security Council has referred the situation to the Prosecutor, irrespective of the nationality of the accused or the location of the crime...."

On the matter of Genocide, the Court makes it clear that it is only concerned with pretty major cases. This is what the Court says on this...

"...In addition, a case will be inadmissible if it is not of sufficient gravity to justify further action by the Court..."

... From which we can see that there is a scale of the crime of Genocide... bottom line is that there needs to be a awful lot of people Genocided if it is to lead to criminal proceedings.

Now, just how this scale of "sufficient gravity" effects past events in CY is another debate.

[Demonax]

Boys and girls...

If we are to talk about Genocides, Crimes against Humanity etc etc...

The relevant body and international treaty for these crimes are the International Criminal Court with the authority of the Rome Statute.

True. We should also note that under international law it has been designated that the following Turkish war crimes and violations were/are being committed in Cyprus:

In general, Turkey was found guilty by the European Commission of Human Rights for:
Displacement of persons
Deprivation of liberty
Ill treatment
Deprivation of Life
Deprivation of Possessions

The Turkish policy of forcing a third of the island's Greek population from their homes in the occupied North, preventing their return and settling Turks from the mainland there is considered an example of ethnic cleansing.

According to historian Brad R. Roth, writing in a volume published by Oxford University Press:

This is the case of Cyprus, where external guarantors were reserved "the right to take action" to preserve a constitutional arrangement providing for power- sharing between the two ethnic groups that together comprised the Cypriot political community. In 1974, Turkey invoked the treaty as a justification (or pretext) for invading Cyprus. a move that, although plausibly provoked by predatory designs of the extra-constitutional Cypriot leadership in collusion with Greece, led to a partition of the country accompanied by measures now known as "ethnic cleansing".

According to historian Thomas M. Franck, writing in a volume published by Cambridge University Press:

Once its objective had been achieved by the collapse of the Greek junta, however, Turkey went on to occupy a disproportionate part of the island, precipitating large-scale ethnic cleansing The UN system, although of necessity positioning its peacekeepers along the resultant line of demarcation forged by events beyond its control, firmly rejected – and, almost three decades later still rejects — the island's forcible partition in violation of the "territorial integrity" endorsed both by the Council and Assembly.

According to historians David A. Lake and Donald S. Rothchild writing in a volume published by Princeton University Press:

In Cyprus, the ethnic cleansing of the northern part of the island and its secession as the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus has not received international recognition, beyond Turkey (Richarte 1995).

In 1976 and again in 1983, the European Commission of Human Rights found Turkey guilty of repeated violations of the European Convention of Human Rights. Turkey has been condemned for preventing the return of Greek Cypriot refugees to their properties. The European Commission of Human Rights reports of 1976 and 1983 state the following:

Having found violations of a number of Articles of the Convention, the Commission notes that the acts violating the Convention were exclusively directed against members of one of two communities in Cyprus, namely the Greek Cypriot community. It concludes by eleven votes to three that Turkey has thus failed to secure the rights and freedoms set forth in these Articles without discrimination on the grounds of ethnic origin, race, religion as required by Article 14 of the Convention.

Greek Cypriots who were enclaved in the occupied Karpass Peninsula in 1975 were subjected by the Turks to violations of their human rights so that by 2001 when the European Court of Human Rights found Turkey guilty of the violation of 14 articles of the European Convention of Human Rights in its judgement of Cyprus v. Turkey (application no. 25781/94), less than 600 still remained. In the same judgement, Turkey was found guilty of violating the rights of the Turkish Cypriots by authorising the trial of civilians by a military court.

Since the Turkish invasion, a large number of Turks have been brought to the north from Anatolia in violation of Article 49 of the Geneva Convention and hence a war crime, to occupy the homes of the Greek Cypriot refugees.

The European commission of Human Rights with 12 votes against 1, accepted evidence from the Republic of Cyprus, concerning the rapes of various Greek-Cypriot women by Turkish soldiers and the torture of many Greek-Cypriot prisoners during the invasion of the island.

Source: Wikipedia