Cyprus-Forum.com

[Sotos]

I really do understand why you are all so surprised at this ? Taksim was an inevitable reaction to enosis ? Without enosis there could have been no way to achieve taksim even if the desire for it amongst TC was the same (and without enosis it would not have been).

Enosis was the right of the Cypriot people because it was supported by the majority of the population which is also the native population. Enosis did not entail any harm to your human rights... you could continue living in your homes with no less rights than what you had during British rule. Partition on the other hand is a crime with its main ingredients being ethnic cleansing and stealing of properties. Just comparing the two proves how sick and criminal you are... like nothing has changed in your murderous mentality since the first time you invaded our island killing 10s of thousands of people a few centuries ago... or when in 1821 you massacred 100s of innocent people just because they dared to think about freedom. In your sick mind the native people demanding their freedom gives you an excuse for genocides and ethnic cleansing. And we see this not just in Cyprus and Greeks but also with Armenians, Kurds etc.

[Lordo]

dream on and just as soon as you see some sense we will unite again, till then do as you wish with your half of cyprus.

[erolz66]

I really do understand why you are all so surprised at this ? Taksim was an inevitable reaction to enosis ? Without enosis there could have been no way to achieve taksim even if the desire for it amongst TC was the same (and without enosis it would not have been).

Enosis was the right of the Cypriot people because it was supported by the majority of the population which is also the native population. Enosis did not entail any harm to your human rights... you could continue living in your homes with no less rights than what you had during British rule. Partition on the other hand is a crime with its main ingredients being ethnic cleansing and stealing of properties. Just comparing the two proves how sick and criminal you are... like nothing has changed in your murderous mentality since the first time you invaded our island killing 10s of thousands of people a few centuries ago... or when in 1821 you massacred 100s of innocent people just because they dared to think about freedom. In your sick mind the native people demanding their freedom gives you an excuse for genocides and ethnic cleansing. And we see this not just in Cyprus and Greeks but also with Armenians, Kurds etc.

Just as GC had the right to demand the end of British colonial rule in their homeland so too did TC have the right to resist its replacement with colonial rule from Greece in their homeland. The idea that enosis was the legitimate expression of the right to self determination of a unitary Cypriot people is just plain nonsense. You can say being forced against your will in your own homeland to submit to foreign rule is 'no harm to our human rights' but to do so is again nonsense, as the right to self determination s the fundamental right from which all others derive, That is what you sought to deprive TC of then, with the use of systematic ethnic based violence as part of the means of trying to do that.

I have never argued that taksim, achieved by force of arms against the will of GC is right or justified. I have and do argue that the pursuit of taksim was an inevitable reaction to pursuit of enosis. Enosis was not achievable without impinging on the valid rights of TC, which is why you could not get any support for it internationally. Similarly taksim was not achievable without impinging on the valid rights of GC, which is why we could not get any support for it internationally. You tried to impose enosis through the use of first inter communal force of arms against the TC and then via external force from Greece and failed. In response we tried to impose taksim by external force from Turkey and we succeeded.

The difference between us Sotos is I recognise that imposed taksim and the way it was achieved was wrong where as you do not recognise that imposed enosis and the way you tried to achieve it was wrong. You still insist that it was right. That is why you are the reason that to date we have not reached a settlement in Cyprus and I am not.

[Jerry]

I really do understand why you are all so surprised at this ? Taksim was an inevitable reaction to enosis ? Without enosis there could have been no way to achieve taksim even if the desire for it amongst TC was the same (and without enosis it would not have been).

Enosis was the right of the Cypriot people because it was supported by the majority of the population which is also the native population. Enosis did not entail any harm to your human rights... you could continue living in your homes with no less rights than what you had during British rule. Partition on the other hand is a crime with its main ingredients being ethnic cleansing and stealing of properties. Just comparing the two proves how sick and criminal you are... like nothing has changed in your murderous mentality since the first time you invaded our island killing 10s of thousands of people a few centuries ago... or when in 1821 you massacred 100s of innocent people just because they dared to think about freedom. In your sick mind the native people demanding their freedom gives you an excuse for genocides and ethnic cleansing. And we see this not just in Cyprus and Greeks but also with Armenians, Kurds etc.

Just as GC had the right to demand the end of British colonial rule in their homeland so too did TC have the right to resist its replacement with colonial rule from Greece in their homeland. The idea that enosis was the legitimate expression of the right to self determination of a unitary Cypriot people is just plain nonsense. You can say being forced against your will in your own homeland to submit to foreign rule is 'no harm to our human rights' but to do so is again nonsense, as the right to self determination s the fundamental right from which all others derive, That is what you sought to deprive TC of then, with the use of systematic ethnic based violence as part of the means of trying to do that.

I have never argued that taksim, achieved by force of arms against the will of GC is right or justified. I have and do argue that the pursuit of taksim was an inevitable reaction to pursuit of enosis. Enosis was not achievable without impinging on the valid rights of TC, which is why you could not get any support for it internationally. Similarly taksim was not achievable without impinging on the valid rights of GC, which is why we could not get any support for it internationally. You tried to impose enosis through the use of first inter communal force of arms against the TC and then via external force from Greece and failed. In response we tried to impose taksim by external force from Turkey and we succeeded.

The difference between us Sotos is I recognise that imposed taksim and the way it was achieved was wrong where as you do not recognise that imposed enosis and the way you tried to achieve it was wrong. You still insist that it was right. That is why you are the reason that to date we have not reached a settlement in Cyprus and I am not.

Pure and utter rubbish, if Cyprus was 40 miles off the west coast of Greece the Turkish Cypriots would have accepted their minority status and behaved like any other British Colony but they knew they could win support from the mainland because of Turkey's paranoia about its "protecting southern flank". The Turks of Rhodes accept their minority status, what's so special about the TCs? Ah yes what they want is achievable because they are in Turkey's backyard, nothing to do with democracy.

[Maximus]

I really do understand why you are all so surprised at this ? Taksim was an inevitable reaction to enosis ? Without enosis there could have been no way to achieve taksim even if the desire for it amongst TC was the same (and without enosis it would not have been).

Enosis was the right of the Cypriot people because it was supported by the majority of the population which is also the native population. Enosis did not entail any harm to your human rights... you could continue living in your homes with no less rights than what you had during British rule. Partition on the other hand is a crime with its main ingredients being ethnic cleansing and stealing of properties. Just comparing the two proves how sick and criminal you are... like nothing has changed in your murderous mentality since the first time you invaded our island killing 10s of thousands of people a few centuries ago... or when in 1821 you massacred 100s of innocent people just because they dared to think about freedom. In your sick mind the native people demanding their freedom gives you an excuse for genocides and ethnic cleansing. And we see this not just in Cyprus and Greeks but also with Armenians, Kurds etc.

Just as GC had the right to demand the end of British colonial rule in their homeland so too did TC have the right to resist its replacement with colonial rule from Greece in their homeland. The idea that enosis was the legitimate expression of the right to self determination of a unitary Cypriot people is just plain nonsense. You can say being forced against your will in your own homeland to submit to foreign rule is 'no harm to our human rights' but to do so is again nonsense, as the right to self determination s the fundamental right from which all others derive, That is what you sought to deprive TC of then, with the use of systematic ethnic based violence as part of the means of trying to do that.

I have never argued that taksim, achieved by force of arms against the will of GC is right or justified. I have and do argue that the pursuit of taksim was an inevitable reaction to pursuit of enosis. Enosis was not achievable without impinging on the valid rights of TC, which is why you could not get any support for it internationally. Similarly taksim was not achievable without impinging on the valid rights of GC, which is why we could not get any support for it internationally. You tried to impose enosis through the use of first inter communal force of arms against the TC and then via external force from Greece and failed. In response we tried to impose taksim by external force from Turkey and we succeeded.

The difference between us Sotos is I recognise that imposed taksim and the way it was achieved was wrong where as you do not recognise that imposed enosis and the way you tried to achieve it was wrong. You still insist that it was right. That is why you are the reason that to date we have not reached a settlement in Cyprus and I am not.

What valid rights and none sense peppered with contradiction are you talking about now? why didn't the Ottomans in Cyprus react the same way and demand Taksim when the British arrived?

Does Greece, Armenia and Kurdistan have valid rights to Taksim parts of modern day Turkey? I think their rights are valid.

[repulsewarrior]

i say if Turkey, (the State which first promoted a BBF (to which the Republic is a party to)) ignores the need for a Greek Constituency in Cyprus to exist, so that "Greeks" are equal to "Turks", as well as a Republic, it is because in Turkey, where in effect there are the same divisions (and need for reform), so too in Turkey, a Turkish Constituency at some point must represent itself as an equal to other Constituencies distinctly different, but Turkish; having the same partition offered to "them" ((the "Greeks") in Cyprus), seems to imply that those "Turkish" (in Turkey) would settle for a Turkey divided in parts, at war, forever.

Does Greece, Armenia and Kurdistan have valid rights to Taksim parts of modern day Turkey? I think their rights are valid.

...in Cyprus, Turkey must lead, for Humanity's sake, not her own. what is "gifted" to "Greeks", may well be what the "Turks" of Turkey will have to accept for themselves.

[erolz66]

What valid rights and none sense peppered with contradiction are you talking about now? why didn't the Ottomans in Cyprus react the same way and demand Taksim when the British arrived?

Look I get it. I understand that you believe GC had and have a right to demand the end of foreign rule in their own homeland and that TC did not and do not. I understand you believe that GC have such rights and TC do not. Just as I understand that it is this very belief that is at the root of the Cyprus problem historically and today.

[Sotos]

I really do understand why you are all so surprised at this ? Taksim was an inevitable reaction to enosis ? Without enosis there could have been no way to achieve taksim even if the desire for it amongst TC was the same (and without enosis it would not have been).

Enosis was the right of the Cypriot people because it was supported by the majority of the population which is also the native population. Enosis did not entail any harm to your human rights... you could continue living in your homes with no less rights than what you had during British rule. Partition on the other hand is a crime with its main ingredients being ethnic cleansing and stealing of properties. Just comparing the two proves how sick and criminal you are... like nothing has changed in your murderous mentality since the first time you invaded our island killing 10s of thousands of people a few centuries ago... or when in 1821 you massacred 100s of innocent people just because they dared to think about freedom. In your sick mind the native people demanding their freedom gives you an excuse for genocides and ethnic cleansing. And we see this not just in Cyprus and Greeks but also with Armenians, Kurds etc.

Just as GC had the right to demand the end of British colonial rule in their homeland so too did TC have the right to resist its replacement with colonial rule from Greece in their homeland. The idea that enosis was the legitimate expression of the right to self determination of a unitary Cypriot people is just plain nonsense. You can say being forced against your will in your own homeland to submit to foreign rule is 'no harm to our human rights' but to do so is again nonsense, as the right to self determination s the fundamental right from which all others derive, That is what you sought to deprive TC of then, with the use of systematic ethnic based violence as part of the means of trying to do that.

I have never argued that taksim, achieved by force of arms against the will of GC is right or justified. I have and do argue that the pursuit of taksim was an inevitable reaction to pursuit of enosis. Enosis was not achievable without impinging on the valid rights of TC, which is why you could not get any support for it internationally. Similarly taksim was not achievable without impinging on the valid rights of GC, which is why we could not get any support for it internationally. You tried to impose enosis through the use of first inter communal force of arms against the TC and then via external force from Greece and failed. In response we tried to impose taksim by external force from Turkey and we succeeded.

The difference between us Sotos is I recognise that imposed taksim and the way it was achieved was wrong where as you do not recognise that imposed enosis and the way you tried to achieve it was wrong. You still insist that it was right. That is why you are the reason that to date we have not reached a settlement in Cyprus and I am not.

Greek rule in Cyprus is foreign only to those who are foreign to Cyprus. Greek rule is not a foreign rule for the native people in Cyprus. It is foreign to you because your minority consists of foreign invaders... the ones who occupied Cyprus just a few decades earlier. That the British rule had replaced the Ottoman rule some years earlier doesn't change anything. What you did in the 50s together with your British partners in crime is not much different to what you did in 1821... in both cases on one side you have the native Cypriots asking for their freedom and on the other the foreign oppressors using force against us to maintain their rule on our island.

In the summer of 1570, the Turks struck again, but this time with a full-scale invasion rather than a raid. About 60,000 troops, including cavalry and artillery, under the command of Lala Mustafa Pasha landed unopposed near Limassol on July 2, 1570, and laid siege to Nicosia. In an orgy of victory on the day that the city fell--September 9, 1570--20,000 Nicosians were put to death, and every church, public building, and palace was looted. Word of the massacre spread, and a few days later Mustafa took Kyrenia without having to fire a shot. Famagusta, however, resisted and put up a heroic defense that lasted from September 1570 until August 1571.

During the Greek War of Independence in 1821, the Ottoman authorities feared that Greek Cypriots would rebel again. Archbishop Kyprianos, a powerful leader who worked to improve the education of Greek Cypriot children, was accused of plotting against the government. Kyprianos, his bishops, and hundreds of priests and important laymen were arrested and summarily hanged or decapitated on July 9, 1821.

[Get Real!]

Greek rule in Cyprus is foreign only to those who are foreign to Cyprus. Greek rule is not a foreign rule for the native people in Cyprus. It is foreign to you because your minority consists of foreign invaders... the ones who occupied Cyprus

How come this “Greek rule” is not invasive?

Did they offer you Greek sex and you accepted?

Can’t say the rear entry hasn’t been plentiful for Cyprus…

[Sotos]

What valid rights and none sense peppered with contradiction are you talking about now? why didn't the Ottomans in Cyprus react the same way and demand Taksim when the British arrived?

Look I get it. I understand that you believe GC had and have a right to demand the end of foreign rule in their own homeland and that TC did not and do not. I understand you believe that GC have such rights and TC do not. Just as I understand that it is this very belief that is at the root of the Cyprus problem historically and today.

YOU are the foreign rule. YOU came to our island to oppress US. You can't argue against FACTS. When we were fighting against the British for the freedom of Cyprus, you, instead of accepting that Cyprus can finally be free, decided that the rule of either the whole Cyprus or at least half of it should pass to the previous foreign rulers... the Turks!! And don't tell me that you would have preferred Independence because you DID NOT. At no point in history the Turks wanted an independent Cyprus... for 3 centuries when they ruled Cyprus they had all the power to give Cyprus its independence and they didn't. And during British rule the Turks never talked about independence... it was a GC proposal and the Turks did all they could to have this independence crippled. And you know why? Because enosis or a true independence is the exact same for the Turks because in both cases who rules Cyprus are the native Greek people and as we said already native rule is a foreign rule for the foreign Turks.