Cyprus-Forum.com

[repulsewarrior]

...you might like to think that, but the NYT is not friendly to Cyprus it seems; unfortunately from my personal experience, i felt obliged to write to the editor to correct a map, their map, most recently, where no-where did it read Republic of Cyprus, only "Cyprus", the two parts identified as, "Turkish-cypriot", and "Greek-cypriot". I suggested that, "Republic of Cyprus", and, "Occupied by the Turkish Army", would be more factual, i saw another map (today?) (not theirs but in their paper), it said, "Republic of Cyprus", the other side described as the so-called, "Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus", hardly the best in Journalism, although their reply to my letter was most gracious.

Amerika exists, so does America; in fact it is a question of balance, that is what has propelled this State so far. Questioning authority is good; where does the fulcrum serve them all?

...money talks, i suppose, at the NYT. Turkish Airlines, comes to mind, what with their splashy ad campaigns everywhere on this Continent;
...how else can one of their staff come up with such a goofy description; like saying, New York-american, Oregon-american, German-american, Black-american, Gay-american, as though, an American, does not exist at all.
...can we really expect to see these descriptions in their paper soon, advocating this thinking further? I don't think so, and i don't think anyone of those staffers would want to live in an America like the one they suggest "is", in Cyprus.

[Paphitis]

...you might like to think that, but the NYT is not friendly to Cyprus it seems; unfortunately from my personal experience, i felt obliged to write to the editor to correct a map, their map, most recently, where no-where did it read Republic of Cyprus, only "Cyprus", the two parts identified as, "Turkish-cypriot", and "Greek-cypriot". I suggested that, "Republic of Cyprus", and, "Occupied by the Turkish Army", would be more factual, i saw another map (today?) (not theirs but in their paper), it said, "Republic of Cyprus", the other side described as the so-called, "Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus", hardly the best in Journalism, although their reply to my letter was most gracious.

Amerika exists, so does America; in fact it is a question of balance, that is what has propelled this State so far. Questioning authority is good; where does the fulcrum serve them all?

...money talks, i suppose, at the NYT. Turkish Airlines, comes to mind, what with their splashy ad campaigns everywhere on this Continent;
...how else can one of their staff come up with such a goofy description; like saying, New York-american, Oregon-american, German-american, Black-american, Gay-american, as though, an American, does not exist at all.
...can we really expect to see these descriptions in their paper soon, advocating this thinking further? I don't think so, and i don't think anyone of those staffers would want to live in an America like the one they suggest "is", in Cyprus.

RW,

Americans and NYT are friendly to Cyprus.

What they are not friendly towards is our stupidity. They know we are anti American.

Makarios had the chance to be America's greatest buddy. Apparently, he and Jennedy were suppose to have the same relationship that NZ PM and Obama had as best friends outside of politics.

But alas we always spew our vitriol and do some very silly things.

I want to help change things round a little bit. Cyprus, is a Western country with the same freedoms, values and liberties as the USA and others such as EU and more. This is where we velong and will always belong.

Turkish ah Airlines is a very big company. They advertise on NYT and CNN as well. That's pure business. Their bread and butter.

The point is RW, the Washington Post and NYT and also the Chicago Tribune among a few others are renowned for their excellence in investigative journalism. And they are not shy to put a US Government on the ropes. They have done it many times in the past, the most notorious being Nixon. But they did it to Bush, and Obama with the Snowden Leaks and some of their journalists nearly went to jail for that.

This is a free country. A free press. A country where its citizens have freedom of association and can criticize the State and Government without disappearing or have the police smash your door down.

America is everything Russia isn't today.

And God Damn it yes. I am an Australian but I can judge America by its actions, and society and God damn it it is way better than Russia. You can say superior. No one can deny it.

[Paphitis]

As I told you, I don't read Sputnik because they are non credible links belonging to the criminal Pootin Government.

It's a propaganda mouthpiece from a country which has no free press like the West does.

Our biggest strength and Achilles Heal.

Anyone who gives Sputnik any credence has rocks in their head!

It's not exactly The Washington Post or New York Times now is it? Papers which have attacked even the US Government with the Greatest investigative journalism on the face of this earth and the best print Journalists in the industry.

If you post links to Washington Post or New York Times, I would read it. I will take it with the seriousness it deserves. Link to Sputnik is a serious FAIL and a big waste of time.

Reading Sputnik is like watching North Korean State TV. At least North Korea State TV is actually quite funny though and entertaining.

Boy oh boy ..... you really are in a different world ..... they have reeled you right in! I thought you said you were an expert analyst? You carry on reading the WP and NYT and I expect you also watch CNN and FOX news for The Truth?

Yeh I grew up analyzing Geopolitics but not to question.

Washington Post or NYT don't reel people in. They are the 2 best broadsheets on the planet and famous for their no nonsense reporting. They have also bought down entire US Governments. These papers are written by the people for the people.

Sorry had to cut my post short because had to catch a flight to Sydney.

Speaking of which is the home of another broadsheet of seriously good repute like Washington Post and NYT. It's the Sydney Morning Herald. A Fairfax Publication. Post links to that and I will open it and give it the attention it deserves.

These are papers which tell it as it is. Not afraid to pick a fight with anyone. This is the journalism that flourishes in our free lands.

Don't accuse me of not having any objectivity. You only post links from Russian mouthpieces and propaganda sites. You have never posted anything from Washington Post, NYT and SMH.

I saw you post a link to the Guardian once. A massive improvement but that is not what I would call a publication with a great deal of objectivity as it is a Partisan paper to the Left. Which is fine. In our free countries there are Partisan papers to the Right as well. All great but not completely 100% objective like The Washington Post, NYT, The Australian, The Sydney Morning Herald are etc etc

You're the none objective one that is swallowing the propaganda hook line and sinker.

And what is worse is the fact that people like you have undermined the lives of American, British, Australian, and French Soldiers.

It has been confirmed that the Coalition are working on plans to send a massive deployment to Syria. Eventually we will be at war with Assad. Russia has a lot to think about.

We have a lot to think about too. Once our ground troops are in Syria, it will never be to Assad's benefit I think you should all come to terms with that reality from now. It will be an invasion.

[Paphitis]

I'm not going to point-by-point. Life's too short.

Twist, turn, wriggle and obfuscate as much as you wish, however:

You dismissed what most people regard as an internationally respected organisation's report on its investigation into alleged barbarous acts in a Syrian Government prison - out of hand. Scornfully in fact. Conversely, you accept the word of somebody who was something in the country over a decade ago - implicitly. Calling him "Informed" and presenting his opinion as a dismissive counterweight to AI's investigation. Common sense dictates that, given events in that country during the past decade, the man can't possibly be any more informed than you and I, for instance.

You make the case that Russian involvement is legal because the recognised government in Syria invited them in. Then, in almost the next breath, you reject what happened in Vietnam, when an internationally recognised country legally invited the US in. "Are you not being hypocritical when you condemn President Thieu for defending his country against a foreign inspired insurgency (Vietcong) to topple an elected government".

That's not a defence of the Vietnam war and I've no wish to get into an in depth "debate" on that conflict. I merely highlight how to yourself in one case it can be entirely right but in almost the exact same situation, but one which currys no favour with you, entirely wrong. Then a claim of objectivity is made.

The rest of your anti-US stuff has no bearing on what's being highlighted in these posts. My attitude to the US is misrepresented but in any case that's not the issue here. As much as you apparently might wish to make it so.

You talk of "International Law and Conventions" however, they don't apparently apply in the Ukraine or Georgia where you have previously defended President Putin's actions. That, despite the fact the aforesaid laws and conventions have been blatantly broken. There is absolutely no doubt about that. Parts of those sovereign countries have actually been absorbed into Russia. Which is exactly what Hitler did in the Czech Sudentanland and Austria. Another land-grabbing dictator who's excuse was the same - to "protect" his countrymen in minorities there. I appreciate that has no bearing on events in Syrian prisons but it does, once again, demonstrate how something can be entirely right in support of your view, whilst virtually the same thing is entirely wrong - when it suits.

Sputnik and RT are not impartial. They are State media giants in a country controlled by a ruthless dictator. Moreover, one who spent his time in the KGB intimately involved in propaganda and who furthermore tolerates absolutely no internal opposition or dissent. People have been "gotten rid of" quite routinely - in not insignificant numbers. Kim Jong-un is a rank beginner.To accept verbatim what the likes of RT churn out and then try to sweepingly dismiss absolutely anything that emanates from any corner of the MSM seems a little...................... fill in the blank. But the word objective doesn't fit. I don't think you will find many members who post from the sort of places you frequent and approve of. When RT broadcasts stuff that get's Putin impeached and thrown out, or puts some of the Duma in prison for fiddling their expenses I will take another look. Clearly, the very idea is risible. Meanwhile, they are just State mouthpieces - albeit quite clever ones.

Sorry but we are all human and .............................. you can only watch so many open goals missed.

Great post.

Couldn't respond earlier but am now just to effectively bump it to the front of the cue because that's where it should be.

Still, the responses in red have not adequately addressed the lack of objectivity of others whilst they accuse others of the same.

[Robin Hood]

Sorry - it's probably very trendy but don't do point-to-point red.

In a nutshell. You're a bloody hypocrite! Now, there's a revelation.

Print that one out.

Go on - you missed me.

I use red simply to divide my comments from yours, rather than post screeds on detailed explanation. What colour would you like ? Wasn't TLDR one of your frequently used responses in the past. I am trying to avoid boring you with detail!

[Robin Hood]

The ole problem remains unchanged of course. It doesn't matter what's presented to you as evidential. You will just reject it and spout on about "the MSM" or, whatever suits. Telling people how gullible they are. Then you will link to articles in bonkers, anti-western fringe sites like informationclearinghouse or blacklistednews, presenting them as some sort of holy grail of truth. Or (things move on) the latest fad, everything that comes out of Russian State media is clearly gospel.

https://www.lexisnexis.com/legalnewsroo ... ellum.aspx

You can find reams of articles like this. Even your precious UN has condemned it. Although, as with most other things, you will cite resolutions which suit but when it comes to those condemning the likes of Iran or Russia's annexation of its neighbouring countries territory, well, that's different of course. Those resolutions are "unfair"

If they are true .... NO! What other country has Iran supposedly annexed? They have not attacked another country in 300 years!

At least you're learning. You don't seem nowadays to condemn other's references to news articles in the Western press whilst doing it yourself. "I thought you would believe it. Coming from this source."

You bitch about Tim Drayton and his ad hominem attacks on you ..... but just look at this post. It is all about me and then discrediting any sources I use. The subject of the OP is missing completely. As you inevitably do, you don't counter argument, you just try to discredit any thing you disagree with using your own views.

So lets have a little test? Up for it? Explain events in Ukraine as you see it, as it is obvious your view of the events there are at odds with mine.

[Robin Hood]

Well not exactly from the NYT but about it and its obvious bias and loyalties........

Is The NYT a Failed Newspaper Sustained By CIA Subsidies? by Stephen Lendman

Times represents pro-Hillary dark forces militantly against Trump – denigrating him relentlessly, featuring advocacy, not real journalism.

Daily feature stories vilify him, going way beyond justifiable criticism. The self-styled newspaper of record mocks fair and balanced reporting, absent on its pages.

It supports US imperial madness, neoliberal harshness harming the nation’s most vulnerable, and police state targeting of nonbelievers.

It’s gone all-out to delegitimize Trump, failed to prevent his electoral triumph, now on a rampage to weaken him irreparably, ideally wanting him removed from office – a coup d’etat by any standard if happens.

Contd ......

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/02/16/nyt-anti-trump-jihad/

[Robin Hood]

Paphitis:

This meets your requirements for standards of journalism it is from the New York Times.......

Why Readers See The Times as Liberal

Even the NYT itself admits it is biased and is haemorrhaging readers ......... they are trying to recover their credibility.

The final sentence says ....... “Imagine a country where the greatest, most powerful newsroom in the free world was viewed not as a voice that speaks to all but as one that has taken sides.Or has that already happened?”

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/24/public-editor/liz-spayd-the-new-york-times-public-editor.html?_r=0

[Paphitis]

Paphitis:

This meets your requirements for standards of journalism it is from the New York Times.......

Why Readers See The Times as Liberal

Even the NYT itself admits it is biased and is haemorrhaging readers ......... they are trying to recover their credibility.

The final sentence says ....... “Imagine a country where the greatest, most powerful newsroom in the free world was viewed not as a voice that speaks to all but as one that has taken sides.Or has that already happened?”

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/24/public-editor/liz-spayd-the-new-york-times-public-editor.html?_r=0

Every news service is biased. All journalists have a bias one way or another.

However, some news services are blatant propaganda mouth pieces like Sputnik is. NYT is a reputable service of very high repute. It's at the pinnacle. But even the tabloids are fairly good, because they are not propaganda services like Sputnik. Their ethos is, if it bleeds, it leads. And they look for blood wherever they can get it, particularly, political blood. NYT has investigative journalists second to none, and everyone knows it. Right now, they are after Trump like they were after Nixon in the past and like they kept Bush and even Obama on their toes.

My partner was a Murdoch journalist for a paper that gave opinion editorials slightly right of Centre which is the usual case for Murdoch. The reporting and the news was completely independent. She got quite a bit of stuff past the editor, about Palestine and the 2 State Solution and the illegal settlements in the West Bank. Her articles were fairly critical of Israel but not obviously so. There were never any phone calls from Murdock telling anyone what to write. She did other stuff about the Kurds, and had a reputation for articles on Cyprus whenever she could.

One day, her articles got the attention of The Israeli Embassy. So they send the Editor a letter saying that The Israeli State would like to host my wife in Israel. So she was called in and the Editor told her she is going to Israel. So she went, and the Israelis politely hosted her, took her to the Knesset, Jerusalem, Gaza and West Bank. There were journalists from the entire world including NYT. They met with Minister of Interior and some other officials as well and it was laid on but the Israelis took the opportunity to State their side of the argument. Which is exactly what they did but there was no pressure from them. They were just professional, and circumspect. So the Journos made reports in an unbiased manner stating the flip side of the coin.

That is just clever and smart lobbying by the Israelis.

She is a Walkoy Award winner too btw. And she is not the average journalist either.

She's also done interviews with Assad. She met Assad in New York. One of the few that has had a face to face with your lover boy. Also with George W Bush, Mohammed Ali, Pappadopoulos, Afghan President, and some others whilst at the UN.

She was also in the Canberra Press Gallery for a while and also been the benefiary of leaks. She was one of the favoured girls by some pollies. And from there, she became a Press Sec and got her PhD in Politics.

She's also met Murdoch Himself, and even wined and dined with him a couple times.

[Robin Hood]

Paphitis:

This meets your requirements for standards of journalism it is from the New York Times.......

Why Readers See The Times as Liberal

Even the NYT itself admits it is biased and is haemorrhaging readers ......... they are trying to recover their credibility.

The final sentence says ....... “Imagine a country where the greatest, most powerful newsroom in the free world was viewed not as a voice that speaks to all but as one that has taken sides.Or has that already happened?”

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/24/public-editor/liz-spayd-the-new-york-times-public-editor.html?_r=0

Every news service is biased. All journalists have a bias one way or another.

However, some news services are blatant propaganda mouth pieces like Sputnik is. NYT is a reputable service of very high repute. It's at the pinnacle. But even the tabloids are fairly good, because they are not propaganda services like Sputnik. Their ethos is, if it bleeds, it leads. And they look for blood wherever they can get it, particularly, political blood. NYT has investigative journalists second to none, and everyone knows it. Right now, they are after Trump like they were after Nixon in the past and like they kept Bush and even Obama on their toes.

My partner was a Murdoch journalist for a paper that gave opinion editorials slightly right of Centre which is the usual case for Murdoch. The reporting and the news was completely independent. She got quite a bit of stuff past the editor, about Palestine and the 2 State Solution and the illegal settlements in the West Bank. Her articles were fairly critical of Israel but not obviously so. There were never any phone calls from Murdock telling anyone what to write. She did other stuff about the Kurds, and had a reputation for articles on Cyprus whenever she could.

One day, her articles got the attention of The Israeli Embassy. So they send the Editor a letter saying that The Israeli State would like to host my wife in Israel. So she was called in and the Editor told her she is going to Israel. So she went, and the Israelis politely hosted her, took her to the Knesset, Jerusalem, Gaza and West Bank. There were journalists from the entire world including NYT. They met with Minister of Interior and some other officials as well and it was laid on but the Israelis took the opportunity to State their side of the argument. Which is exactly what they did but there was no pressure from them. They were just professional, and circumspect. So the Journos made reports in an unbiased manner stating the flip side of the coin.

That is just clever and smart lobbying by the Israelis.

She is a Walkoy Award winner too btw. And she is not the average journalist either.

She's also done interviews with Assad. She met Assad in New York. One of the few that has had a face to face with your lover boy. Also with George W Bush, Mohammed Ali, Pappadopoulos, Afghan President, and some others whilst at the UN.

She was also in the Canberra Press Gallery for a while and also been the benefiary of leaks. She was one of the favoured girls by some pollies. And from there, she became a Press Sec and got her PhD in Politics.

She's also met Murdoch Himself, and even wined and dined with him a couple times.

I have 'wined and dined' with the late Duke of Westminster but when you are just one in a few hundred, it is hardly accurate to make it sound as if we were close associates or in fact that he even knew who the hell I was!

So instead of giving us your partners CV ..... why don't you get her to post on here her honest impressions of Assad the man himself. I have a funny feeling that if you are honest your views are very much at odds with hers because going by your post she has experience in the region.