Cyprus-Forum.com

[cypriotnado]

https://books.google.com.cy/books?id=HEjkuhF2GsMC&pg=PA38&lpg=PA38&dq=British+Defence+and+Overseas+Policy+cyprus+1964&source=bl&ots=9o3rhbxfJm&sig=EeoaWoNtbiTFMl0e8bZSt8bJVgQ&hl=tr&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=British%20Defence%20and%20Overseas%20Policy%20cyprus%201964&f=false

GIG, there are a lot of different views about it... some pro-this, pro-that and some balanced... but there are some wievs that have been grandmotherly filtered out from a "picture" for a special purpose and presented us as if it was the whole "picture"... this is no good...

However, what I posted were not opinions by some authors!

They are OFFICIAL documents of the British government and its policy makers. These documents have been recently released for public viewing.

As usual you have NOT posted any truths. Just your old tricks, you just cut and paste the bits that suit your ridiculous arguments and ignore the bits that don't. History is full of discussions and proposals they mean very little. The Brits offered Cyprus to Greece in 1915 In return for Greece joining the war. The Greeks declined to YELLOW to fight. Uganda was offered to the Jews as an alternative Jewish homeland. Means NOTHING,,,, Discussions mean nothing. What's relevent is the NOW today, not some half baked deluded pipe dream.Enosis is dead my old Frau and buried deep .....move on!

[GreekIslandGirl]

https://books.google.com.cy/books?id=HEjkuhF2GsMC&pg=PA38&lpg=PA38&dq=British+Defence+and+Overseas+Policy+cyprus+1964&source=bl&ots=9o3rhbxfJm&sig=EeoaWoNtbiTFMl0e8bZSt8bJVgQ&hl=tr&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=British%20Defence%20and%20Overseas%20Policy%20cyprus%201964&f=false

GIG, there are a lot of different views about it... some pro-this, pro-that and some balanced... but there are some wievs that have been grandmotherly filtered out from a "picture" for a special purpose and presented us as if it was the whole "picture"... this is no good...

However, what I posted were not opinions by some authors!

They are OFFICIAL documents of the British government and its policy makers. These documents have been recently released for public viewing.

As usual you have NOT posted any truths. !

What I posted are from official documents but as usual because you don't like what they say you cannot accept them as truth. Truth is not only those things you want to read.

Hic hic hic!

[erolz66]

Using the Internet to help you write better is good, but it doesn't seem to help you with improving your understanding.

British Defence and Overseas Policy May 1964

Better?

Such classic GiG / Oracle blatant distortion of demonstrable fact to suit her propaganda objective. She makes out that it was British POLICY to offer financial and other aid to resettle TC. In order to do this she uses a document produced in a book by William Mallinson (himself a far from impartial source). This can be seen here

http://books.google.com.cy/books?id=DJJ ... &q&f=false

This document was produced FOR the defence and overseas policy committee BY the ministry of Defence. The purpose of this document is laid out in its first paragraph.

This paper has been prepared at Ministry of Defense instigation in order that co-ordinated advise may be given to Ministers before Mr Tumioja, the UN Mediator in Cypus, discusses the Cyprus problem with Mr Sandys

what is more the section that she quotes as being "British Defence and Overseas Policy May 1964" - when the actual title of the document is "British Defence and Overseas Policy May 1964 Brief" explicitly starts with "The high commissioner concludes ...." and then "He (the high commissioner) suggests..."

This is classic GiG distortion of historical fact.

She tries to make out that the section she quoted was official British policy as made BY the British Defence and Overseas Policy committee. The FACT is it was the conclusion of the High Commissioner, not official British government policy - reported in a document produced not BY the British Defence and Overseas Policy committee but FOR them.

There can be no rational discussion with GiG in my view. She will twist distort distract and simply ignore and deny fact as and when suits her requirements as she has always done.

[cypriotnado]

I suspect the Frau tortured small animals as a child such is her level of disturbance.
Hic....

[insan]

Using the Internet to help you write better is good, but it doesn't seem to help you with improving your understanding.

British Defence and Overseas Policy May 1964

Better?

Such classic GiG / Oracle blatant distortion of demonstrable fact to suit her propaganda objective. She makes out that it was British POLICY to offer financial and other aid to resettle TC. In order to do this she uses a document produced in a book by William Mallinson (himself a far from impartial source). This can be seen here

http://books.google.com.cy/books?id=DJJ ... &q&f=false

This document was produced FOR the defence and overseas policy committee BY the ministry of Defence. The purpose of this document is laid out in its first paragraph.

This paper has been prepared at Ministry of Defense instigation in order that co-ordinated advise may be given to Ministers before Mr Tumioja, the UN Mediator in Cypus, discusses the Cyprus problem with Mr Sandys

what is more the section that she quotes as being "British Defence and Overseas Policy May 1964" - when the actual title of the document is "British Defence and Overseas Policy May 1964 Brief" explicitly starts with "The high commissioner concludes ...." and then "He (the high commissioner) suggests..."

This is classic GiG distortion of historical fact.

She tries to make out that the section she quoted was official British policy as made BY the British Defence and Overseas Policy committee. The FACT is it was the conclusion of the High Commissioner, not official British government policy - reported in a document produced not BY the British Defence and Overseas Policy committee but FOR them.

There can be no rational discussion with GiG in my view. She will twist distort distract and simply ignore and deny fact as and when suits her requirements as she has always done.

About the Author

William Mallinson is a Lecturer at the Ionian University, Corfu, and Professor of Diplomatic History and head of the International Relations Department at New York College in Athens. He is a former diplomat and the author of Public Lies and Private Truths.

He should have been very well paid for all of his services to Greece...

[GreekIslandGirl]

The documents are exactly as I quoted and I stated the source as Mallinson. Why do you have to restate what I wrote but make out they are only some opinion? The opinions of the author were NOT quoted - only the original sources from the documents. My goodness, but you hate the truth! I could give you the opinions of the author, but you will hate those even more!

Any distortions are in your mind because you do not want to accept that at the time of 1963 onward, the British had analysed the outcome of their 1960 Constitution as contributing to the conflicts in Cyprus due to the unfair power given to the TCs.

You can order the documents from the UK Ministry (National Archives of Great Britain) or they are catalogued by the former British Diplomat in : Mallinson, W., (2011) Britain and Cyprus: Key Themes and Documents Since World War II.

[cypriotnado]

The documents are exactly as I quoted and I stated the source as Mallinson. Why do you have to restate what I wrote but make out they are only some opinion? The opinions of the author were NOT quoted - only the original sources from the documents. My goodness, but you hate the truth! I could give you the opinions of the author, but you will hate those even more!

Any distortions are in your mind because you do not want to accept that at the time of 1963 onward, the British had analysed the outcome of their 1960 Constitution as contributing to the conflicts in Cyprus due to the unfair power given to the TCs.

You can order the documents from the UK Ministry (National Archives of Great Britain) or they are catalogued by the former British Diplomat in : Mallinson, W., (2011) Britain and Cyprus: Key Themes and Documents Since World War II.

Gone are those days when anyone believes anything you say old demented one. We all know you and your devious games so well
Why not wrap yourself in a greek flag, sit reflect and contemplate your future. Enosis is no more.....

[cypriotnado]

Oh and hic

[erolz66]

The documents are exactly as I quoted and I stated the source as Mallinson. Why do you have to restate what I wrote but make out they are only some opinion? The opinions of the author were NOT quoted - only the original sources from the documents. My goodness, but you hate the truth! I could give you the opinions of the author, but you will hate those even more!

Any distortions are in your mind because you do not want to accept that at the time of 1963 onward, the British had analysed the outcome of their 1960 Constitution as contributing to the conflicts in Cyprus due to the unfair power given to the TCs.

You can order the documents from the UK Ministry (National Archives of Great Britain) or they are catalogued by the former British Diplomat in : Mallinson, W., (2011) Britain and Cyprus: Key Themes and Documents Since World War II.

Same old same old

You quoted partially the title of the document and selectively from the document claiming that the part you quoted was something 'the British' recognised and then extended that to being things 'the British' admitted. The FACT is these were views expressed by a single individual, the then high commissioner for Cyprus, not the British government. When this FACT was pointed out to you, you then posted in bold the partial title of the document and extra large and bold the world 'policy'. You have tried to make out the section you quoted was British policy, something 'the British' recognised and admitted. This is a gross distortion of reality. What you partially quoted was explicitly attributed to the High Commissioner - the full section being

5. The High Commissioner concludes that although enosis is in some ways more attractive than the unitary state, Turkey's objections to it are so strong that it may not be a practicable solution at present. He suggests, therefore, that effort should be concentrated on easing the path to the unitary state, e.g. by providing U.N. safeguards for the minority and by giving financial and other assistance for the resettling of those Turkish Cypriots to whom Cyprus may no longer appear a tolerable home.

The section you quoted was NOT any expression of an official British government position. It WAS clearly the 'conclusions' and 'suggestion' ONLY of the then High Commissioner. These conclusions and suggestions of the High Commissioner were reported in a document that was made FOR the British Defence and Overseas Policy Committee, a briefing document for that committee (the part of the title you omit), it was not in a document written BY the British Defence and Overseas Policy Committee. You GiG try and present the limited quoted section as being the views of 'the British' (government) and having been written BY the British Defence and Overseas Policy Committee. This is exactly the kind of systematic distortion of truth that you specialise in and have done consistently for countless years here on this forum. These distortions are not in my mind, they are here in plain black and white that any and all can see. That you will now spend countless posts trying to deny your distortion, or distract from them with any number of your usual techniques is just business as usual. I have seen it all before too many times.

[Sotos]

Cyprus is today divided because Cypriots sought a post colonial Cyprus based not on their commonalities as Cypriots regardless of their ethnic background but ones based on their differences that were mutualy exclusive as such and proved all to willing to use illegal violence and murder against entirely innocent Cypriots in the pursuit of these goals. Cypriots intimidated and murdered Cypriots of their own communities that advocated creating a united Cyprus. Cypriots killed and murdered innocent Cypriots for no other reasons that they were from the 'other' community. No group is more responsible by their choices, their actions and their lack of actions, for the division we have today in Cyprus than Cypriots. One of the many commonalities that many GC and TC share is the tendency to instinctively seek to blame everyone and anyone but themselves for everything and anything.

That is because we are different. We are the native population, who are Greek and Christian, and the Turks are a foreign to us culture / religion / language which was imposed on our island against our will. Should we blame ourselves for having the bad luck of being invaded by the Turks? I am not against finding as many commonalities as possible, but your position is wrong as a matter of principle. If tomorrow we are invaded by Arab Islamist fundamentalists and they manage to hold on to Cyprus for a couple of centuries creating an Arab minority in Cyprus, would that mean that when we manage to gain our freedom that we would have to find a commonality between Sharia law and Islamic religious fundamentalism, and our aspiration for a European democratic Cyprus? Of course no. We will respect your human rights, you can have some minority rights like in other democratic countries, if there are some commonalities GREAT, but beyond that we are not obligated to sacrifice our principles and aspirations to satisfy the demands of every minority.