mrfromng, with all due respect of your age and what you been through in Cyprus. I see where your thoughts against Greeks came from. But there are inaccuracies on both sides of the fence when you hear discriminations stories. Greeks have to deal with reading and hearing them as well as the Turks who lived in Cyprus before 1974. But to say that Greeks went on a killing spree to wipe out Turks in Cyprus, how didnt they get you if you witnessed it and let you go home. I'm not saying it didn't happen(have no proof on that, but anyway)Cmon man, act your age. Again, this isnt a site to relive the past, and keep the hatred going. Its dedicated to try and resolve the problem. How many times do you hear stories of Greeks reliving in detail the way you do about blood on this site. We just know thats not the way to move on. Everyones bitter about this, but to prolong it with only the stories you want to believe and nothing else, makes me sad and angry. The sad part is for feeling for what we Both went through, but angry to only wanting to tell your scars and why we should sacrifice our properties because your feelings got hurt. Its not a one way street where only your feelings count. Cyprus being in Turkeys backyard, cost us 32years and running of discrimination, hatred, theft, lies, and not wanting to give it back ever, is only racism at its fullest. With that kind of attitude, I dont expect you to want to share anything, or sacrifice anything. But i do expect that you give us back our shit, that my family had for hundreds of years.
A court case usually goes a maximum of eight years, Turkey quadrupeled that time with no compensation or resolution. And they want to get into the EU, and do honest business. lol...........The EU should make a mandatory rule for Turkey to do business and make them wear a black patch over their right eye before any deals till they prove otherwise.
homebuyers pressure group
by Alexis » Mon Mar 13, 2006 10:24 pm
Hi rawk,
Yes, I have heard of the Akritas plan and am familiar with much of what it says, despite having read a number of different versions most of which were incomplete. This document is certainly damning evidence of some kind of conspiracy to make killings of of TCs appear as normal or somehow necessary, what it does not show however is that the objective was the wiping out of TCs from Cyprus, moreover it cites as it's aim Enosis with Greece and acknowledges that there would be TC resistance to this. But this document alone is not enough to indict the whole administration. Certainly Makarios himself when interviewed on the issue insisted that he was not privy to creating this document and that when he was approached on the matter he made it clear that he wanted nothing to do with it. Now, of course it comes down to whether we believe him or not. The next thing we must bear in mind is that this document was written with aims (flawed ones in my opinion) to facilitate Enosis. The document describes the way in which Enosis can be achieved via deception and suppression of any TC resistance. However descpicable the document is, it is quite a leap to planned widespread elimination of the TCs from Cyprus.
Again, please don't view this post as playing-down the nature of this document. The document makes it quite clear that to facilitate Enosis, the killing of innocent Turkish Cypriots is acceptable and clearly this is a sorry indictment on the administration, but this is quite different to advocating the elimination of the TC community en masse.
Yes, I have heard of the Akritas plan and am familiar with much of what it says, despite having read a number of different versions most of which were incomplete. This document is certainly damning evidence of some kind of conspiracy to make killings of of TCs appear as normal or somehow necessary, what it does not show however is that the objective was the wiping out of TCs from Cyprus, moreover it cites as it's aim Enosis with Greece and acknowledges that there would be TC resistance to this. But this document alone is not enough to indict the whole administration. Certainly Makarios himself when interviewed on the issue insisted that he was not privy to creating this document and that when he was approached on the matter he made it clear that he wanted nothing to do with it. Now, of course it comes down to whether we believe him or not. The next thing we must bear in mind is that this document was written with aims (flawed ones in my opinion) to facilitate Enosis. The document describes the way in which Enosis can be achieved via deception and suppression of any TC resistance. However descpicable the document is, it is quite a leap to planned widespread elimination of the TCs from Cyprus.
Again, please don't view this post as playing-down the nature of this document. The document makes it quite clear that to facilitate Enosis, the killing of innocent Turkish Cypriots is acceptable and clearly this is a sorry indictment on the administration, but this is quite different to advocating the elimination of the TC community en masse.
- Alexis
- Contributor
- Posts: 405
- Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2005 3:36 pm
- Location: UK
by NeverSayGoodbye » Mon Mar 13, 2006 10:29 pm
Even if there were no turkish cypriots in Cyprus.Turkey will of still have found a way to occupy Cyprus.Its obvious that the hostily between the two communities was DIRECTED.A bunch of stupid Greek-cypriots fell into the trap and opened the door for Turkey.So all this the Greeks did that and then the turks did this is just bla bla bla bla.We all know well now how the game "Lets go protect to poor minority" is played.
So in other words Turkey came to Cyprus to save the turkish cypriots from the bad greeks?
Bringing here every moggolian from whereever ..oh yeah there here to protect to the turks sorry.
Stealing the heritage of cyprus and selling it..ops sorry protecting the turkish cypriot minority.
killing,raping and every other barbaric acts done by turkish soldiers ..Getting revenge i assume..
So in other words Turkey came to Cyprus to save the turkish cypriots from the bad greeks?
Bringing here every moggolian from whereever ..oh yeah there here to protect to the turks sorry.
Stealing the heritage of cyprus and selling it..ops sorry protecting the turkish cypriot minority.
killing,raping and every other barbaric acts done by turkish soldiers ..Getting revenge i assume..
- NeverSayGoodbye
- Member
- Posts: 172
- Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 7:44 pm
by rawk » Mon Mar 13, 2006 11:33 pm
Hi Alexis
Thanks for your response. I personally feel that before any land issues are sorted out, Cyprus needs some sort of Truth and Reconciliation process such as the South African model.
Because of the conflict, there has been a lot of injustice and this has transgressed laws, such as title deeds and rights to ownership and property etc.
However in the 1974 conflict, other laws were broken, more serious laws than those relating to property and ownership, these laws relate to murder, genocide, human rights and the right to life.
In this area, judges must look critically at the shape of the laws and atribute precedance. No law stands alone, it is bound in a body of legislation and there is a hierarchy to them. Laws are not equal, although transgressing any of them will incur a penalty. But again this is reflected in the heirarchy of penalties.
If I forget to take my library book back or don't pay my TV licence I will incur a penalty, if I murder someone I will incur a penalty. Both laws have been broken and penalties given. Do I get life imprisonment for the TV licence evasion and a £100 fine for the murder? Of course not.
There is a scale to these matters, the seizure of Greek Cypriot land in the north is as a result of the expulsion of GCs from the north and TCs from the south. Both acts were illegal. However, the actions by those responsible for these results were also illegal and higher up the scale, ie massacre and genocide on both sides. This needs to be addressed before that of the land issue.
Unfortunately, the intervention of the UN with no associated political will to achieve justice allowed the Turkish military and nationalists with Denktash to secure the north and the failed EOKA wannabees in the south to dominate their respective communities.
Both are now clamoring out for justice, crying foul over the land issue without acknowledging deeper injustices. The more serious human rights transgressions need to be addressed on a national level before the lesser rights to land and ownership are resolved.
I would like to add that I am not ducking the land issue, I know how easy it is to give a cosy vague reference to "resolution of the land issue".
I appreciate how important it is, but 32 years is a long time, if land that is owned that is untouched it should be returned to the rightful owner, if there is a villa or house occupied, it should be returned with either the option for the occupier to buy or vacate with compensation from the TRNC. If land has been built on with a complex, a hotel or development, full compensation for loss should also be paid. An independant commission should look at each case on its merits, not just for the loss of land but loss of livelihood for the family over the years since 1974.
Bear in mind, not just land but whole landscapes have been changed in the TRNC, the memories of displaced GCs of their homes and lands from a third of a century ago are distent dreams related to the reality now. You can't walk back into the past.
rawk
Thanks for your response. I personally feel that before any land issues are sorted out, Cyprus needs some sort of Truth and Reconciliation process such as the South African model.
Because of the conflict, there has been a lot of injustice and this has transgressed laws, such as title deeds and rights to ownership and property etc.
However in the 1974 conflict, other laws were broken, more serious laws than those relating to property and ownership, these laws relate to murder, genocide, human rights and the right to life.
In this area, judges must look critically at the shape of the laws and atribute precedance. No law stands alone, it is bound in a body of legislation and there is a hierarchy to them. Laws are not equal, although transgressing any of them will incur a penalty. But again this is reflected in the heirarchy of penalties.
If I forget to take my library book back or don't pay my TV licence I will incur a penalty, if I murder someone I will incur a penalty. Both laws have been broken and penalties given. Do I get life imprisonment for the TV licence evasion and a £100 fine for the murder? Of course not.
There is a scale to these matters, the seizure of Greek Cypriot land in the north is as a result of the expulsion of GCs from the north and TCs from the south. Both acts were illegal. However, the actions by those responsible for these results were also illegal and higher up the scale, ie massacre and genocide on both sides. This needs to be addressed before that of the land issue.
Unfortunately, the intervention of the UN with no associated political will to achieve justice allowed the Turkish military and nationalists with Denktash to secure the north and the failed EOKA wannabees in the south to dominate their respective communities.
Both are now clamoring out for justice, crying foul over the land issue without acknowledging deeper injustices. The more serious human rights transgressions need to be addressed on a national level before the lesser rights to land and ownership are resolved.
I would like to add that I am not ducking the land issue, I know how easy it is to give a cosy vague reference to "resolution of the land issue".
I appreciate how important it is, but 32 years is a long time, if land that is owned that is untouched it should be returned to the rightful owner, if there is a villa or house occupied, it should be returned with either the option for the occupier to buy or vacate with compensation from the TRNC. If land has been built on with a complex, a hotel or development, full compensation for loss should also be paid. An independant commission should look at each case on its merits, not just for the loss of land but loss of livelihood for the family over the years since 1974.
Bear in mind, not just land but whole landscapes have been changed in the TRNC, the memories of displaced GCs of their homes and lands from a third of a century ago are distent dreams related to the reality now. You can't walk back into the past.
rawk
-
rawk - Contributor
- Posts: 648
- Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 11:03 pm
- Location: Larnaca on Sea, Cyprus
by bakala » Tue Mar 14, 2006 12:48 am
i will follow very closly this Sensible debate between Alexis and Rawk
it may be best if evreyone else lets these two Guys intelleigently continue uninteruppted by the usual hystrionics of other people butting in and diverting them with the usual claptrap
Please continue Guys
it may be best if evreyone else lets these two Guys intelleigently continue uninteruppted by the usual hystrionics of other people butting in and diverting them with the usual claptrap
Please continue Guys
-
bakala - Contributor
- Posts: 319
- Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 1:19 pm
- Location: uk
by Agios Amvrosios » Tue Mar 14, 2006 1:17 am
Its is completely sensible to me that individuals are punished- the Collective punishment of every member of a particular ethnic group just because some individuals may have gone off the rails is racist and a war crime.
In Cyprus everyone is being asked to suffer because of the individual acts of a handful of people.
In Cyprus everyone is being asked to suffer because of the individual acts of a handful of people.
- Agios Amvrosios
- Contributor
- Posts: 857
- Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 3:18 am
by rolo » Tue Mar 14, 2006 2:23 am
Alexsis- this is respectfully for you, since you are a free thinker and would like to know the true concerns of a tc.
I first visited Cyprus in 66 and stayed for about six months. my concerns:
After independence in 1960 Makarios was made president, then it really gets messy and confused.
He became President of a newly formed nation. Where his ambitions and loyalties lay is the real mystery. On the one hand his greek and gc rivals still wanted to complete the hope of enosis. Their reasoning was that (a) with the british now gone getting rid of the tcs shouldn’t be too much of a problem, and it could be done in a week or so, before turkey had time to react, and once this had been accomplished there would be no reasonable obstacle to completing the original goal i.e. enonsis. Or (b) the tcs would have to accept enosis whether they wanted it or not.
Of all the high ranking greek and gc officials Makarios was the one who stood back and took the threat of Turkey implementing guarantor power seriously. Or then again, as a man of God maybe he found it hard to reconcile his religious beliefs with slaughtering innocent beings. The Greek mainland leaders became untrusting of Makarios, and a rift began to grow between Nicosia and Athens.
From here I see three possibilities
1) Makarios having tasted power in Cyprus turned his back on the idea of Enosis. Why should he now give up the power which he fought the British for, to Athens?
2) As a man of God he may have harboured desires to live in peace and forge an independent nation of gc and tc living in peace and harmony.
3) He still envisaged Enosis.
The first two options enraged Athens – the third enraged Ankara.
Whichever path he took he was damned. He had to keep Athens happy, Athens did presumably finance his war of independence against Britain and wanted to see the rewards of their backing. He had to keep Ankara happy as well.
Under these conditions it is no surprise that whatever he did he had to do under a veil of secrecy. Did he authorise the sporadic attacks which gcs inflicted upon tcs, or did someone like grivas backed by Athens do them without Makarios’s knowledge.
Did Makarios still harbour real thoughts of enosis, but fearing Turkish guarantor power would not authorise a full scale attack on tcs, but instead played a diplomatically subtle game of mild ethnic cleansing of tcs, with political deprivation of tcs under the banner of protecting the national interest, together with the sporadic violent attacks on tcs, making security and life so uncomfortable for tcs that they would want to leave of their own accord, thus enabling the completion of Enosis, with limited bloodshed.
Two post coup Makarios Quotes -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Makarios#Quotes
“The coup of the Greek junta is an invasion, and from its consequences the whole people of Cyprus suffers, both Greeks and Turks.” - Makarios, July 19, 1974, UN Security Council
“Independence was not the aim of the EOKA struggle. Foreign factors have prevented the achievement of the national goal, but this should not be a cause for sorrow, New bastions have been conquered and from these bastions the Greek Cypriots will march on to complete the final victory.” - Makarios, August 16, 1974
hmmmm
The “Final Victory”?
Makarios was no fool, he was a highly intelligent man whose loyalties and aspirations for himself and his people had to constantly be juggled to suit the conflicting interests of Athens, Enosis, Ankara, an Independent Cyprus, the Greek Cypriots, and the Turkish Cypriots.
“Foreign factors”?
Britain didn’t really come into it that much and would have been happy with any settlement agreed upon by Greece, Turkey, and the people of Cyprus, providing Britain kept a presence on the island i.e. their bases, particularly in light of the middle east. America was happy to use the british bases for intelligence, after all they had large bases in Turkey. Americas biggest concern was keeping the Soviets out of Cyprus.
Turkey?
Turkey was well aware that with no Tcs on Cyprus Turkey would have no legal reason, to be on Cyprus, and certainly no international support. To this end and with tcs position and will gradually eroding, did they have something to do with the planning of the 74 coup, thus giving them a right to send in her troops? Turkey certainly did not want to stand by and allow the suffering of tcs only 40 miles from her shores.
USA?
It has been said that the coup was USA backed, if so they would have been the winner whatever the result. They would have the Greek colonels whom they allegedly supported in charge of Cyprus, instead of Makarios who had threatened friendship with the Soviets, or USA would have had any ally Turkey in the driving seat. However it should be noted that Turkey did not take all of Cyprus but only a third. This may have been because of US demands, or it may have been to provide a safe haven for tcs, as well as providing a military presence on both two sides of the sea off her southern shores.
Greece
During the 60's She secretly sent between 10 and 20,000 thousand soldiers to Cyprus, what were they for? and what kind of govt was Makarios running if he was unaware of these soldiers?. Cyprus is not such a big place that 20 or even 10 thousand soldiers go un-noticed.. As a defense force even 20,000 Greek soldiers wouldn’t have held up a real Turkish military attack for more than a few months.
I first visited Cyprus in 66 and stayed for about six months. my concerns:
After independence in 1960 Makarios was made president, then it really gets messy and confused.
He became President of a newly formed nation. Where his ambitions and loyalties lay is the real mystery. On the one hand his greek and gc rivals still wanted to complete the hope of enosis. Their reasoning was that (a) with the british now gone getting rid of the tcs shouldn’t be too much of a problem, and it could be done in a week or so, before turkey had time to react, and once this had been accomplished there would be no reasonable obstacle to completing the original goal i.e. enonsis. Or (b) the tcs would have to accept enosis whether they wanted it or not.
Of all the high ranking greek and gc officials Makarios was the one who stood back and took the threat of Turkey implementing guarantor power seriously. Or then again, as a man of God maybe he found it hard to reconcile his religious beliefs with slaughtering innocent beings. The Greek mainland leaders became untrusting of Makarios, and a rift began to grow between Nicosia and Athens.
From here I see three possibilities
1) Makarios having tasted power in Cyprus turned his back on the idea of Enosis. Why should he now give up the power which he fought the British for, to Athens?
2) As a man of God he may have harboured desires to live in peace and forge an independent nation of gc and tc living in peace and harmony.
3) He still envisaged Enosis.
The first two options enraged Athens – the third enraged Ankara.
Whichever path he took he was damned. He had to keep Athens happy, Athens did presumably finance his war of independence against Britain and wanted to see the rewards of their backing. He had to keep Ankara happy as well.
Under these conditions it is no surprise that whatever he did he had to do under a veil of secrecy. Did he authorise the sporadic attacks which gcs inflicted upon tcs, or did someone like grivas backed by Athens do them without Makarios’s knowledge.
Did Makarios still harbour real thoughts of enosis, but fearing Turkish guarantor power would not authorise a full scale attack on tcs, but instead played a diplomatically subtle game of mild ethnic cleansing of tcs, with political deprivation of tcs under the banner of protecting the national interest, together with the sporadic violent attacks on tcs, making security and life so uncomfortable for tcs that they would want to leave of their own accord, thus enabling the completion of Enosis, with limited bloodshed.
Two post coup Makarios Quotes -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Makarios#Quotes
“The coup of the Greek junta is an invasion, and from its consequences the whole people of Cyprus suffers, both Greeks and Turks.” - Makarios, July 19, 1974, UN Security Council
“Independence was not the aim of the EOKA struggle. Foreign factors have prevented the achievement of the national goal, but this should not be a cause for sorrow, New bastions have been conquered and from these bastions the Greek Cypriots will march on to complete the final victory.” - Makarios, August 16, 1974
hmmmm
The “Final Victory”?
Makarios was no fool, he was a highly intelligent man whose loyalties and aspirations for himself and his people had to constantly be juggled to suit the conflicting interests of Athens, Enosis, Ankara, an Independent Cyprus, the Greek Cypriots, and the Turkish Cypriots.
“Foreign factors”?
Britain didn’t really come into it that much and would have been happy with any settlement agreed upon by Greece, Turkey, and the people of Cyprus, providing Britain kept a presence on the island i.e. their bases, particularly in light of the middle east. America was happy to use the british bases for intelligence, after all they had large bases in Turkey. Americas biggest concern was keeping the Soviets out of Cyprus.
Turkey?
Turkey was well aware that with no Tcs on Cyprus Turkey would have no legal reason, to be on Cyprus, and certainly no international support. To this end and with tcs position and will gradually eroding, did they have something to do with the planning of the 74 coup, thus giving them a right to send in her troops? Turkey certainly did not want to stand by and allow the suffering of tcs only 40 miles from her shores.
USA?
It has been said that the coup was USA backed, if so they would have been the winner whatever the result. They would have the Greek colonels whom they allegedly supported in charge of Cyprus, instead of Makarios who had threatened friendship with the Soviets, or USA would have had any ally Turkey in the driving seat. However it should be noted that Turkey did not take all of Cyprus but only a third. This may have been because of US demands, or it may have been to provide a safe haven for tcs, as well as providing a military presence on both two sides of the sea off her southern shores.
Greece
During the 60's She secretly sent between 10 and 20,000 thousand soldiers to Cyprus, what were they for? and what kind of govt was Makarios running if he was unaware of these soldiers?. Cyprus is not such a big place that 20 or even 10 thousand soldiers go un-noticed.. As a defense force even 20,000 Greek soldiers wouldn’t have held up a real Turkish military attack for more than a few months.
Last edited by rolo on Tue Mar 14, 2006 3:02 am, edited 5 times in total.
- rolo
- Member
- Posts: 189
- Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 10:15 pm
by bakala » Tue Mar 14, 2006 2:32 am
ill tell you what guys
I vote that Alexis and rawk should be locked in a room together with a never ending supply of beer and a couple of nice girls and left to sort out the Cyprus issue between them
and evryone agrees to abide by their decision
they are doing better on thier own than 30 years of political arguing has ever done
I vote that Alexis and rawk should be locked in a room together with a never ending supply of beer and a couple of nice girls and left to sort out the Cyprus issue between them
and evryone agrees to abide by their decision
they are doing better on thier own than 30 years of political arguing has ever done
-
bakala - Contributor
- Posts: 319
- Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 1:19 pm
- Location: uk
by bakala » Tue Mar 14, 2006 2:40 am
Rolo
i think you paint a picture of a peaceful ( i include TCs and GCs )people caught in the middle of a giant political Chess game where they get dragged into a civil war they didnt want and forced to take sides just to survive,
is that a fair evaluation Rolo ?
i think you paint a picture of a peaceful ( i include TCs and GCs )people caught in the middle of a giant political Chess game where they get dragged into a civil war they didnt want and forced to take sides just to survive,
is that a fair evaluation Rolo ?
-
bakala - Contributor
- Posts: 319
- Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 1:19 pm
- Location: uk
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests
© 2002 - 2015 Cyprus-Forum.com
