Cyprus-Forum.com

[Sotos]

People of all sorts of nationalities have come to Cyprus over the millenniums but that doesn’t mean you acquire their nationality and/or ethnicity just because they’ve come and/or settled here!

That we are Greek is a mere fact that only an idiot would try to deny. Our culture and language are Greek so either our ancestors were already Greek when they came to Cyprus or they acquired the Greek ethnicity at some point in the very distant past (or most possibly a combination of the two). If you claim that acquiring an ethnicity is impossible, that would mean that all our ancestors were already Greek when they came to Cyprus. I don't think that this is the case but this is the result we get from following your logic. The truth is that large numbers of Greeks came to Cyprus and most of the others that pre-existed in Cyprus as well as most others that came later gradually assimilated into the Greek majority. That is exactly how it works in real life, not just in Cyprus but everywhere.

[GreekIslandGirl]

People of all sorts of nationalities have come to Cyprus over the millenniums

Yes, but they came to an island that was already ethnically and culturally Greek. Every time some other uninvited group arrives to an already established nation, they are invaders. Those can be beaten and removed or stay and assimilate. It's an ongoing housekeeping job. But the household is Greek.

[repulsewarrior]

...more to the point, Greek, was the lingua franca at the time, unless you lived within the realm of the barbarian, you spoke Greek.

...more to the point, it is likely that Greek was spoken on the islands, before the pre-eminence of the Greek mainland, and the city-states, it spawned.

...more to the point, Greek, has survived, in a purer state if you will, here, being isolated and self sustaining. Cyprus, is Greek, if you will, and in its own way more deserving of that identity than Greece.

...Greek, or not, Cyprus is Cyprus, Cypriots exist, they identify with each other as an ethnos, not "Greek". We can say at least that we are overwhelmingly Greek as a People, we speak Arabic, and Turkish as well, English (and French) too.

[supporttheunderdog]

People of all sorts of nationalities have come to Cyprus over the millenniums but that doesn’t mean you acquire their nationality and/or ethnicity just because they’ve come and/or settled here!

That we are Greek is a mere fact that only an idiot would try to deny. Our culture and language are Greek so either our ancestors were already Greek when they came to Cyprus or they acquired the Greek ethnicity at some point in the very distant past (or most possibly a combination of the two). If you claim that acquiring an ethnicity is impossible, that would mean that all our ancestors were already Greek when they came to Cyprus. I don't think that this is the case but this is the result we get from following your logic. The truth is that large numbers of Greeks came to Cyprus and most of the others that pre-existed in Cyprus as well as most others that came later gradually assimilated into the Greek majority. That is exactly how it works in real life, not just in Cyprus but everywhere.

Pre 1050'bc there was was probably little that was Greek about Cyprus. Probably a few itinerant merchants and sailors, not much more. Around that time there was some development in the use of Greek in parts of Cyprus, theorised by some to be after an invasion event, posdibly a small mostly mske group, with elitist supremacy driving some local linguistic change, much as probably later happened under the ottomans,but much of the Island still had Levantine connections and spoke Levantine languages, ie Phonecian. There is very little prospect that any heros of the Trojan war founded cities. Timing is wrong both ways as in many places the cities predate the Assumed date of the Trojan war and the earliest obvious Hellenisation was probably too long after, possibly by 100 year.

The main change was likelybabout 320bc when the island was seized by the Ptolomys who apparently forcefully imposed Greek across the whole island, as the one official language. No one seems to complain about that....z

The number of incomers from Greece probably was quite small....probably no where near a majority.,

That was almost certainly the case with saxons in the Uk now thought to be between 5000 and 50000 irregular migrants over a 100 year or more period with a resident population of possibly 2 million, rather than a massive influx, mind the there is a theory A proto English was being spoken in Eastern Britain from about 300 bc

[Sotos]

It makes little difference if first Greeks in Cyprus were in 1050 BC or 1210 BC (which is the most commonly accepted time) or if they were heroes of the Trojan war or not. In either case it is over 3000 years which is a VERY long time. If Cyprus is not Greek after 3000+ years then NO territory on earth could possibly be English or Turkish because neither the English nor the Turks have settled on the same territory for anywhere near 3000 years (same with most other ethnic groups). The Phoneticians came to Cyprus AFTER the Greeks. The people that lived in Cyprus before the Greeks were not Phoneticians and their origins are just a speculation. They could have also been from Africa, Anatolia or Europe. Nobody knows. Maybe they were various peoples coming from different places... that is also entirely possible.

Your argument about the Ptolemy is bullshit. It is one thing what the official language of the empire was and another thing what the local villagers speak. If it was like that then the whole territory that was once occupied by the Ptolemy would speak Greek today. And more generally people would change their native language every time they come under an empire with a different official language. That argument is clearly false. Greek has been the main language in Cyprus long before the Ptolemy.

The Greeks came to Cyprus in large numbers (for their era) and created new cities in Cyprus. This is what the Greeks did all over the Mediterranean (and not just the Greeks, Phoenicians and others did the same). The Ottomans brought 10s of thousands of people from Anatolia and this is again a historical fact. It seems to me you are trying to re-write history not based on facts but based on some politically motivated wishful thinking that all Cypriots are of the same origin. If you could I am sure you would claim that the recent Turkish Settlers are descendants of the pre-historic people of Cyprus! The only difference is that this lie would be obvious because the facts of their settlement are very recent.

[GreekIslandGirl]

The root of the plight of refugees is TURKEY!

Overall, Turkey must be behind some of the biggest ethnic cleansing, mass murderous migrations and usurping of peoples ever experienced in human history.

And yet the EU Commission is criticising and threatening sanctions against Greece.

This is the EU Commission calling you a liar:

Finally, it should, in the light of the above, be recalled that the application of Article 26 of the Schengen Borders Code is a safeguard for the overall functioning of the Schengen area. It is not a sanction against any Member State, nor does it aim at excluding any Member State from the Schengen area.

[erolz66]

This is the EU Commission calling you a liar:

Finally after three and half months of pure nonsense from you, you present something that is a rational argument based on actual evidence.

Firstly not what I do NOT do in response to such.

I do not just ignore it.
I do not claim your source is a 'debating site' or 'not the EU' or some such nonsense.
I do not start a BS discussion about you inability to distinguish between debate and policy within the EU and such like.
I do not just claim the EU did not say that application of Article 26 is not a sanction against member state.

What I do when presented with a rational argument based on actual evidence is address it.

So they (the EU Commission) say that implementing Article 26 does not aim at excluding a member state from Schengen, which I maintain means that it still can end up doing so even if that was not its specific aim. It's aim it to protect Schengen. If in order to achieve this aim, it is necessary to only close those internal borders between Greece and other members only, the the effect is to exclude Greece and only Greece from Schengen.

As far as it not being a 'sanction' - yes here the EU claims doing such is not a sanction. I disagree with them on this point and what is more I am far from alone in this opinion. To me stating that you can, for a period of time, impose the closing of internal borders between Greece and other Schengen members, against Greece's will, effectively excluding Greece from Schengen, if Greece does not achieve X within a specific timespan - is to threaten Greece with sanction. I admit that EU say in document you quote such is not a sanction but I am of the view that such a claim is more spin than reality.

[GreekIslandGirl]

As far as it not being a 'sanction' - yes here the EU claims doing such is not a sanction. I disagree with them on this point

Here we have it after months of asking you for the quote of were the EC was supposed have made such a threat as you claimed, and all you did was evade and divert - and now we have it that you 100% lied and now have the audacity to 'disagree' with them.

Tough.

Stop making stuff up!

[GreekIslandGirl]

So they (the EU Commission) say that implementing Article 26 does not aim at excluding a member state from Schengen, which I maintain means that it still can end up doing so even if that was not its specific aim. It's aim it to protect Schengen. If in order to achieve this aim, it is necessary to only close those internal borders between Greece and other members only, the the effect is to exclude Greece and only Greece from Schengen.

Twist away - as soon as one of your lies has been re-exposed you're out to spin another.

And ........ Internal borders between Greece and who?

[erolz66]

Twist away - as soon as one of your lies has been re-exposed you're out to spin another.

And ........ Internal borders between Greece and who?

No twisting at all. Just honest direct addressing of the point you raised (after three and half months of you made up fantasies).

With Greece in Schengen, there is no boarder controls when flying (sailing) from a Greek airport (port) to an airport (port) in another Schengen member state - at either end. That is what Schengen means for a country that has no land boarder with another Schengen member. If the EU decided in order to protect Schengen there will have to be a reintroduction of boarder controls on such journeys , because of Greece's inability to rectify its serious deficiencies re it's management of the external boarders in Greece, this would be the suspension of Greece from Schengen. It would not be the aim (protect schengen) but would be the result. Not that hard to understand, but given how you have spent 3 plus months trying to claim 'failure by Greece' means 'failure by everyone but Greece' no doubt fertile ground for your 'games'.