Cyprus-Forum.com

[Lordo]

listen stupid there is no proportionality in equal power. either you accept equal power or furque off and enosis.

[erolz66]

It is one thing for a GC to say that there might be a war to defend our island or liberate the part that it is occupied and another thing for a Turk/TC to say that there will be a war for maintaining or expanding their illegal occupation of my island. We are in different "camps", and that is the situation we find ourselves in. It is not my choice.

you are in the 'camp' sotos by CHOICE, that says it is a BAD idea to embark on bi-communal efforts to try and show respect for each others cemeteries because we may yet have to kill each other and the ONLY reason you CHOOSE to be in that camp was because a GC said this. If a TC had said it you would NOT have chosen to be in that camp.

What should I change in myself? I already support a free and democratic Cyprus.

Why should you change choosing to define how you behave to another Cypriot views here based on if that Cypriot is TC or GC, if you really want a Cyprus where it does not matter what kind of Cypriot you are ? That should be self evident and the fact that you can not even admit to yourself that you do this is part of the problem - a part you personally have direct absolute control over.

The "us" that says freedom and democracy to Cyprus without any excuses.

No Sotos what you want is a SINGULAR form of democracy an no other, not because you believe that given our situation and history such a singular form of democracy is the only one that would best deliver the IDEALS of democracy to ALL those who call Cyprus their homeland, you want such a SINGULAR form of democracy knowing that if those who consider Cyprus their homeland were to choose a future for all Cypriots that is NOT based on being Cypriot REGARDLESS of their ethnic differences but solely BECAUSE of their ethnic differences, then your ethnic community would ALWAYS get what it wants, mine would NEVER get to have any effective voice in their own homeland in such a scenario.Stop lying to us and yourself.

No. All they need to accept is that Cyprus should be free and democratic and stop trying to excuse the contrary.

What is the objective of democracy. What does it seek to 'achieve'. It seeks to achieve an ideal that people have an effective say in the decision that shape and control their lives. You want a 'democratic' When Cypriots choices as to what they want or do not want are regardless of what kind of Cypriot they are, then indeed 'one person one vote' is the best MEANS to achieve the ideals of democracy. However when those choices are defined solely by if your are a GC or a TC, then such a MEANS is not the best way to achieve the ideals. This has been understood by the worlds greatest thinkers on 'democracy' from Plato onwards, that for 'one person one vote' to be a valid MEANS of achieving democracy there HAS to be some greater commonality that binds all of those people together that they can be said to BE a singular people.

That really depends on what exactly is "often". I don't claim I have the absolute truth and I am willing listen to other views and see other facts if they are presented. As long as this is not done in an one-sided way and does not aim to create excuses for imposing in Cyprus something which is unfair and undemocratic.

What do YOU consider 'often' means - for you are the one who used the word and made the claim, whilst also claiming to be yourself 'objective'. Of the TC murdered in the period 63-68, what % do YOU think would have had to have been killed by TMT for the claim to be 'objective' ? 0.1 %, 1%, 10 %, 30%, 50% ? That you refuse to even countenance that your claim that 'tmt OFTEN killed TC' is itself 'one-sided' just shows how much you lie to yourself.

I have no unfair demands, so no.

You demand a singular means of democracy that would allow GC alone, because they are GC and not TC, to be free to seek a future for all Cypriots that would destroy the very and only thing that could legitimately bind us together in such a way that such a vote could be considered compatible with the ideal of democracy. That is what you demand, absolutely and unwaveringly and despite the history and such is not a 'fair' demand, not if you believe in the ideals that underpin the very concept of democracy.

I just counter the Turkish excuses with facts

It is not a fact that TMT 'often killed TC'. It is a fact that it did happen but it is not a fact that it happened often. More lying to yourself Sotos.

that show that during our history the blame lies mostly with the Turkish side, that we are the ones who suffered the most and for the longer periods and that therefore the Turkish side have no right to demand anything unfair and undemocratic on our expense.

We need to understand what Cyprus was actually like for Cypriots in the past and how that became so if we are to not keep on making the same mistakes again. We need to understand for example how we got to a Cyprus where an innocent Cypriot could be taken in broad daylight from his place of work in front of countless witnesses, by illegal armed men, murdered and his body dumped in a well and where other ordinary Cypriots "couldn’t go out and speak against it because we were truly afraid for our lives.". The only response you have to such attempts to try and understand such things here is that they are attempts to lay the blame solely on GC side, who suffered way more in any case, and are the one sided views of a Turk that supports and justifies the events of 74. This is the only way you can respond and you still have to ask yourself 'why should I change how I behave' if you truly want a Cyprus where it does not matter if you are GC or TC ?

[Lordo]

minister in control of the police force was georgadjis a know murderer, there are countless examples of policemen taking people away never to be seen again.

bbf with two zones is the only answer and if that fails so be it. it will be two countries.

[erolz66]

Shouldn't that ratio be 82:18 or at least 1:5?

You want 5:1 - fine, have it. Have 6:1 if it helps reach an agreement that both sides can endorse for all I care.

In an earlier post you admitted that there was a way out of that.

In an early post I said that from memory of having looked at the plan in detail over 10 years ago, there was a clause that could possibly have been claimed to have undermined this temporary nature of these provisions (if read and interpreted in a certain light). I said it because that was what I remembered but you know what, having been forced to go back and look again 10 years later, I can not now find such clause. I do NOT just present what suits 'my side', unlike some. I could easily have not said anything about the 'woolly clause' that could possibly have been interpreted as having undermined the temporary nature of restrictions on right to residency.

Even if that was the case the Greek state was a truly independent state and had no intention to be part of the Ottoman empire ever again.

Even if this was the case ? Do you deny that it was the case ? No comment then on the reason why I pointed this out, that such behaviour is not unique to 'Turks' ? We are just going to forget that are we and now shift the goal post to

On the other hand in the north you have been doing such things at the same time that we were negotiating the unification of Cyprus. Doesn't this show that the TC leadership is not honest in their desire for a true unification?

The TC leadership had been attempting to negotiate a settlement since 1963. The changing of names in the north was afaik started AFTER the declaration of the TRNC in 84. A more 'honest' statement that the TC community in face of decades of failing to find an agreement, would not just hold themselves in 'aspic' in perpetuity awaiting a settlement but would instead forge ahead on their own whilst they continued to seek an settlement, would be hard to imagine.

What the constitution of RoC said was the result of political machination, inter communal strife and the illegal use of force including against innocents. What is fair is for TCs to share power in a proportional and democratic way .. neither the pre-63 nor the post-63 arrangement was fair. In terms of land what is fair is to have no division and all Cypriots to be free on the whole of Cyprus. But the Turkish side wants to keep most of what they took illegally in 1974 AND take a share of power that is even more than what they had pre-63.

Yet is WAS a signed agreement, considered by the whole world to be legitimate and what is more one that those leading GC who were best placed to know, said explicitly in the Akritas plan was one an agreement that the Cypriot people at that time would have themselves ratified if they had been given the opportunity to do so.

You stole the RoC from TC illegally. We in turn stole part of the RoC illegaly.

It is NOT fair to say that the GC community acting purely BECAUSE of their differences as Cypriots to TC had a right to impose enosis on the TC community without having to pay ANY regard what so ever for the wishes of the TC community. Such is not 'fair', it is not 'democratic' and it is not compatible with the ideals and the spirit of the right to self determination of peoples.

[Lordo]

this one is for the deaf dumb and blind on the forum.

[Sotos]

you are in the 'camp' sotos by CHOICE, that says it is a BAD idea to embark on bi-communal efforts to try and show respect for each others cemeteries because we may yet have to kill each other and the ONLY reason you CHOOSE to be in that camp was because a GC said this. If a TC had said it you would NOT have chosen to be in that camp.

I didn't say it was a bad idea, I said I understand the general reasoning about activities that could make GCs get used to the occupation. I was very specific on this.

Why should you change choosing to define how you behave to another Cypriot views here based on if that Cypriot is TC or GC, if you really want a Cyprus where it does not matter what kind of Cypriot you are ? That should be self evident and the fact that you can not even admit to yourself that you do this is part of the problem - a part you personally have direct absolute control over.

I gave you the example of Kikapu. It is not the ethnicity that matters for me but the views expressed. It is not my fault that most TCs have a hostile to us position which I obviously can not agree with.

No Sotos what you want is a SINGULAR form of democracy an no other, not because you believe that given our situation and history such a singular form of democracy is the only one that would best deliver the IDEALS of democracy to ALL those who call Cyprus their homeland, you want such a SINGULAR form of democracy knowing that if those who consider Cyprus their homeland were to choose a future for all Cypriots that is NOT based on being Cypriot REGARDLESS of their ethnic differences but solely BECAUSE of their ethnic differences, then your ethnic community would ALWAYS get what it wants, mine would NEVER get to have any effective voice in their own homeland in such a scenario.Stop lying to us and yourself.

You are the one who is lying to us and to yourself. The democracy I want is the same as most democratic countries and we consistently accept this true democracy no matter where we are. There is a Greek minority in Turkey, they are happy to just have their minority rights. The do not demand that they should determine the future of the whole country. On the other hand where the Turks are the majority this usual form of democracy is fine. In Cyprus that Turkish people are a minority you are looking for EXCUSES to keep denying to us our freedom and our democratic rights.

What is the objective of democracy. What does it seek to 'achieve'. It seeks to achieve an ideal that people have an effective say in the decision that shape and control their lives. You want a 'democratic' When Cypriots choices as to what they want or do not want are regardless of what kind of Cypriot they are, then indeed 'one person one vote' is the best MEANS to achieve the ideals of democracy. However when those choices are defined solely by if your are a GC or a TC, then such a MEANS is not the best way to achieve the ideals. This has been understood by the worlds greatest thinkers on 'democracy' from Plato onwards, that for 'one person one vote' to be a valid MEANS of achieving democracy there HAS to be some greater commonality that binds all of those people together that they can be said to BE a singular people.

More EXCUSES. There is no greater commonality between the Greeks and the Turks in Turkey than there is in Cyprus.

What do YOU consider 'often' means - for you are the one who used the word and made the claim, whilst also claiming to be yourself 'objective'. Of the TC murdered in the period 63-68, what % do YOU think would have had to have been killed by TMT for the claim to be 'objective' ? 0.1 %, 1%, 10 %, 30%, 50% ? That you refuse to even countenance that your claim that 'tmt OFTEN killed TC' is itself 'one-sided' just shows how much you lie to yourself.

I already said that if I had the wrong impression I am willing to read the evidence you will provide and be convinced if your claims are true. What more do you want?

You demand a singular means of democracy that would allow GC alone, because they are GC and not TC, to be free to seek a future for all Cypriots that would destroy the very and only thing that could legitimately bind us together in such a way that such a vote could be considered compatible with the ideal of democracy. That is what you demand, absolutely and unwaveringly and despite the history and such is not a 'fair' demand, not if you believe in the ideals that underpin the very concept of democracy.

More EXCUSES. Despite what history? For the 80% of our common history on this island we have been oppressed by Turks, while the period you can claim we oppressed you is less than 5%. In terms of amount of casualties the disparity is just as great. Please don't tell me you understand democracy when in your whole history you have done nothing else other than violating our democratic rights.

It is not a fact that TMT 'often killed TC'. It is a fact that it did happen but it is not a fact that it happened often. More lying to yourself Sotos.

Provide the evidence and I might be convinced after I see them.

We need to understand what Cyprus was actually like for Cypriots in the past and how that became so if we are to not keep on making the same mistakes again. We need to understand for example how we got to a Cyprus where an innocent Cypriot could be taken in broad daylight from his place of work in front of countless witnesses, by illegal armed men, murdered and his body dumped in a well and where other ordinary Cypriots "couldn’t go out and speak against it because we were truly afraid for our lives.". The only response you have to such attempts to try and understand such things here is that they are attempts to lay the blame solely on GC side, who suffered way more in any case, and are the one sided views of a Turk that supports and justifies the events of 74. This is the only way you can respond and you still have to ask yourself 'why should I change how I behave' if you truly want a Cyprus where it does not matter if you are GC or TC ?

They are attempts to lay the blame on the GC side because they are selective to blame only the GC side. If you are willing to take our whole common history and see all the mistakes and crimes from the beginning until today then I have absolutely no problem. Quite the contrary.

In an early post I said that from memory of having looked at the plan in detail over 10 years ago, there was a clause that could possibly have been claimed to have undermined this temporary nature of these provisions (if read and interpreted in a certain light). I said it because that was what I remembered but you know what, having been forced to go back and look again 10 years later, I can not now find such clause. I do NOT just present what suits 'my side', unlike some. I could easily have not said anything about the 'woolly clause' that could possibly have been interpreted as having undermined the temporary nature of restrictions on right to residency.

It doesn't matter if you said it or not. We also read the plan back then. Obviously I can't remember every line of it after a decade, but I can clearly remember that it was a bad plan and that the division was not temporary.

The TC leadership had been attempting to negotiate a settlement since 1963. The changing of names in the north was afaik started AFTER the declaration of the TRNC in 84. A more 'honest' statement that the TC community in face of decades of failing to find an agreement, would not just hold themselves in 'aspic' in perpetuity awaiting a settlement but would instead forge ahead on their own whilst they continued to seek an settlement, would be hard to imagine.

So basically the moment they declared the "trnc" they changed the names even though there were negotiations for the unification of Cyprus. In Greece it took nearly a century to change the names, what was the rush in your case?

Yet is WAS a signed agreement, considered by the whole world to be legitimate and what is more one that those leading GC who were best placed to know, said explicitly in the Akritas plan was one an agreement that the Cypriot people at that time would have themselves ratified if they had been given the opportunity to do so.

You stole the RoC from TC illegally. We in turn stole part of the RoC illegaly.

It is NOT fair to say that the GC community acting purely BECAUSE of their differences as Cypriots to TC had a right to impose enosis on the TC community without having to pay ANY regard what so ever for the wishes of the TC community. Such is not 'fair', it is not 'democratic' and it is not compatible with the ideals and the spirit of the right to self determination of peoples.

That constitution would never be approved by the Cypriot people without Makarios asking from them to do so. RoC is today as legal as it has always been. Unfortunately you are again trying to excuse all the political machinations and use of force when we are the victims, but then you are quick to cry foul when it is about you. We accepted that there will be no enosis but not even that will satisfy you. All you care is how you will find excuses to keep denying to Cyprus democracy and freedom.

[erolz66]

I didn't say it was a bad idea, I said I understand the general reasoning about activities that could make GCs get used to the occupation. I was very specific on this.

I gave you the example of Kikapu. It is not the ethnicity that matters for me but the views expressed. It is not my fault that most TCs have a hostile to us position which I obviously can not agree with.

Keep pretending that how you reacted to Piratis saying this is the SAME as how you would have reacted if I said exactly the same, even though you have already admitted you would not. It is just not credible.

The democracy I want is the same as most democratic countries and we consistently accept this true democracy no matter where we are.

Cyprus is not 'most countries'. Sure you define and limit 'true democracy' to a singular form and you do that BECAUSE such benefits your community at the expense of mine.

There is a Greek minority in Turkey, they are happy to just have their minority rights. The do not demand that they should determine the future of the whole country. On the other hand where the Turks are the majority this usual form of democracy is fine. In Cyprus that Turkish people are a minority you are looking for EXCUSES to keep denying to us our freedom and our democratic rights.

The Greek minority in Turkey is able to exercise it's right to self determination as part of the Turkish people and nation. You want to claim that the TC were able to do so as part of a Cypriot people and nation at the very time you sought the non existence of a Cypriot nation and people. I have (personally) offered everything you want, no bi zonality, no bi communality, no 'special privileges' , no Turkish guarantee and no Turkish troops on Cyprus. In return I want a SINGLE thing. I want you accept that if you should AGAIN seek to act not as Cypriots in commonality with me and REGARDLESS of our ethnic differences but BECAUSE of them, then I want you to accept that you must at least CONSIDER my communities voice in their own shared homeland , in the form of separate consent, in this unlikely and rare exceptional case only. Yet even this is too much for you Sotos. I am NOT seeking to deny your community its rights as a community I am just begging and pleading with you to respect MINE, and all you can respond with is - yours does not have such rights, at all, in any way shape or form. Between the two of us, one party is demanding everything, is intransigent and it is NOT me.

More EXCUSES. There is no greater commonality between the Greeks and the Turks in Turkey than there is in Cyprus.

Yes there IS a greater commonality, that greater commonality is that they are all Turkish Citizens. You can not, in the name of a common Cypriot people say, we seek for there to be no Cypriot nation. Yet this is the madness you did try and STILL argue was your right. That is why we need 'atypical' forms of democracy.

I already said that if I had the wrong impression I am willing to read the evidence you will provide and be convinced if your claims are true. What more do you want?

You MADE the claim, yet I have to provide the evidence that YOUR claim is not true ? Why did you MAKE the claim in the first place unless you have evidence that it is true ? Why do YOU not show the evidence that it is true ? Or is the truth that you made the claim without any real evidence, simply because such a claim suits your narrative - and you did this whilst protesting that you are 'objective'.

More EXCUSES. Despite what history? For the 80% of our common history on this island we have been oppressed by Turks, while the period you can claim we oppressed you is less than 5%. In terms of amount of casualties the disparity is just as great. Please don't tell me you understand democracy when in your whole history you have done nothing else other than violating our democratic rights.

The history of your communities attempts to try and claim enosis was a legitimate expression of the will of a unitary Cypriot people when enosis sought the very non existence of the one and only thing that COULD make it such a legitimate expression. You do not have to take my view on democracy. Just read Plato's views on democracy or any one of the hundreds of great thinkers on such matters. Or how about you show me ONE single credible 'scholar' of democracy who has ever claimed, since the time of Plato onwards, that the ONLY way to achieve democracy is one person one vote without ANY discussion of who and what the 'group' is that such takes place in and the need for it to have a real commonality. Just one.

Provide the evidence and I might be convinced after I see them.

No YOU provide the evidence for YOUR claim. Or is this another example where the 'rules' differ depending on if the poster is TC or GC. GC can make any claim they like without having to provide any evidence and TC must then provide the evidence to disprove such claims. TC can only make a claim on the condition that they provide the evidence for that claim. Is this all part of you 'wanting a Cyprus where it does not matter if you are TC or GC' and 'being objective' ?

They are attempts to lay the blame on the GC side because they are selective to blame only the GC side. If you are willing to take our whole common history and see all the mistakes and crimes from the beginning until today then I have absolutely no problem. Quite the contrary.

Fuck off Sotos. In the face of claims that 'there were no innocent TC Cypriots in the period 64-68 because they all supported separation and division of Cyprus', I relate the account of what happened to my uncle as EVIDENCE that this claim made by a GC without them providing any evidence, was not true in all cases. Now yuo tell me (after yourself asking am I sure he was not killed by tmt because they often did so, again with no evidence to back that claim up) I am attempting to lay the blame only on GC and I can not mention such a thing without talking about our entire common history from 1571 to today. Like I say Sotos, fuck off.

It doesn't matter if you said it or not. We also read the plan back then. Obviously I can't remember every line of it after a decade, but I can clearly remember that it was a bad plan and that the division was not temporary.

So why do YOU not show the specific section of the plan that backs up your claim that the limits that component states could place on residency were not temporary then ? I have gone to the time and trouble to find and show the part that EXPLICLTY says they were temporary. Or is this again a case of 'you do not need to because you are GC' ?

So basically the moment they declared the "trnc" they changed the names even though there were negotiations for the unification of Cyprus. In Greece it took nearly a century to change the names, what was the rush in your case?

Classic moving the goal posts. You start with the 'claim' that TC changing names in the north was 'duplicitous' behaviour given they were negotiating. When I point out the absurdity of that claim , itself a shifting of the goal post from a prior claim of Nikitas' that did not hold up to scrutiny, you then move them again. And on and on.

That constitution would never be approved by the Cypriot people without Makarios asking from them to do so.

Surely you are not suggesting a mere President of the RoC could have such definitive influence over the GC people on such an important matter ? There was me thinking "People do not vote based on what the President tells them. Some people vote based on what their party tells them but being president does not grand you any additional "sheep". Oh how totally things can change in 50 years.

RoC is today as legal as it has always been. Unfortunately you are again trying to excuse all the political machinations and use of force when we are the victims, but then you are quick to cry foul when it is about you. We accepted that there will be no enosis but not even that will satisfy you. All you care is how you will find excuses to keep denying to Cyprus democracy and freedom.

You want to keep every thing you gained and have return and give up everything we gained. Sorry but that for me is not a good or fair basis for negotiation.

[Sotos]

Erolz, I can't waste more of my time when you make arguments of the type "The Greek minority in Turkey is able to exercise it's right to self determination as part of the Turkish people and nation" To me your double standards are obvious and your excuses to deny this are just silly. I am not going to repeat myself because I already made myself very clear on most issues. Regarding the names issue I didn't move any goal posts... please note that I am not Nikitas. About Makarios, we are talking about a time before independence. He was what we call an "ethnarch". He had the kind of support that nobody else in Cyprus ever had... more than any party or any president. If you didn't know this then you don't the history of Cyprus.

You want to keep every thing you gained and have return and give up everything we gained. Sorry but that for me is not a good or fair basis for negotiation.

What I want is what is fair and what would make Cyprus free and democratic. We would give up things also (e.g. a % of power share), but that is not even the point. How much you "give up" should depend only on how much unfair gains you have.

[erolz66]

Erolz, I can't waste more of my time when you make arguments of the type "The Greek minority in Turkey is able to exercise it's right to self determination as part of the Turkish people and nation" To me your double standards are obvious and your excuses to deny this are just silly.

What is silly Sotos is your refusal to accept why and how the pursuit of enosis rather than independence changed everything. If the GC had of sought independence for Cyprus and all Cypriots, then no power in the world could have or would have stopped you getting the Cyprus you NOW claim you want. If in the face of a pursuit of independence, the TC has still sought the kind of deal they got in the 60's agreements, they just would not have got such. No way. The ONLY reason they were able to get such was because your community CHOOSE not to pursue independence but instead enosis. They had and have every right to do so, but NOT in the name of a unitary Cypriot people, they could only validly claim such was an expression of the will of part of the Greek people who lived in Cyprus, because that was what enosis MEANT. Pursuing it whilst claiming that such was a legitimate and genuine expression of a unitary Cypriot people was a 'tactic', a 'trick', they they mistakenly thought would allow them to ride rough shod of the rights of the TC community, and nobody bought the bullshit then, yet you are still trying to sell it today. That is what is silly.

I am not going to repeat myself because I already made myself very clear on most issues. Regarding the names issue I didn't move any goal posts... please note that I am not Nikitas.

You are not Nikitas but YOU chose to 'shift the goal posts' of his argument that changing names was a 'Turkish' thing. When I showed that it was not just a 'Turkish' thing, you then ignored that and said 'yeah but such name changing does show how duplicitous the TC leadership were'. When I then show how ridiculous a notion THAT is given how absolutely clear the decision to declare the TRNC was, you ignore that and move the goal posts onto 'why the rush'. You can try and claim moving from 'changing names is a Turkish thing', to 'changing names showed how duplicitous the TC leadership was' to 'why the rush' is NOT moving goal posts but such a claim just does not hold water. It is EXACTLY what YOU (not Nikitas) has done here.

What I want is what is fair and what would make Cyprus free and democratic.

No what you wanted, past tense, would NOT have made Cyprus 'free and democratic' if by 'free' you mean 'free of rule from those who are NOT Cypriot and by 'democratic' you mean 'decision about Cyprus are made by Cypriots'. What you wanted then was the exact opposite of this. This is exactly the point and truth you REFUSE to accept and it also exactly the reason why an 'atypical' form of democracy had to be introduce in Cyprus then and now.

We would give up things also (e.g. a % of power share), but that is not even the point. How much you "give up" should depend only on how much unfair gains you have.

The only thing I want you to 'give up' is this absurd notion that you can say the desire for and pursuit of enosis was a valid and genuine expression of the will of a unitary Cypriot people and just accept the truth that it was in fact an expression of the will of one community in Cyprus, a community who at that time that did NOT believe in the principal of a 'free and democratic Cyprus', did not believe that 'Cyprus should be ruled by Cypriots', did not believe that Cyprus should exist as an independent nation and state at all.

[Lordo]

what terggy did does not absolve you from murdering innocent tcs or tc soldiers who have handed their weapons to the un you stupid boy.

That is what happens in wars you idiot. The important thing is not to start them ... not to start wars to ethnically cleanse the native people and take their lands and then bitch that a few of your own were killed. 280 people were too few for such a war. Would Turkey be occupying Cyprus today if we could kill several millions of you?

what kill innocent people, is it really allowed in wars. whats the geneva convention for? to wipe your arse after you been to the toilet from crapping yourself at the sight of mehmetcik. you stupid idiot.