Cyprus-Forum.com

[Viewpoint]

It is not accurate at all.


Firstly for the ancient times it tries to hide the Greek influence on the island. Somebody that is reading that document would be wondering how 82% of the population speaks Greek today and not something else.

Secondly it is totally inaccurate when it comes to the recent events, at which point not only it is inaccurate but it is shamelessly lying in a lame attempt to excuse the crimes and illegalities committed by Turkey against Cyprus.

Piratis, you shouldn't even bother reading it. If it comes from an unrecognised illegal source it is by default disqualified.

GC mentality, they cant see the wall in front of them. Keep it up and you will continue to bang your head on that wall until the day you realize you could walk around it or you die of blood clots to the brain. Your choice....

[Alexis]

Hi all,

This is my ten cents on the website. I believe that on the whole the overview of events in Cyprus is reasonably accurate. The statement of facts are all accurate what are subject to interpretation are the interpretions that go with them. For example:

'Turkish Military intervention (under the provisions of the Treaty of Guarantee of the Republic of Cyprus)'

This gives the fact (the event) but follows it up with an interpretation which promotes the TC point of view. In the case of the interpretations this cannot be considered factual, the events, however, can and I was pleased to see that at least the site tries to stick to events in the overview rather than interpretations. I noticed also that Venetian Rule is referred to as 'Venetian Domination' whilst no era of 'Ottoman Domination' is referenced. This is a small point, but it is the details that count.

This is hardly surprising, but as long as people acknowledge that there is another side to events then there is no problem.

What concerned me more was when you actually click on some of the links and read the details. I am not going to discuss the way that recent events are described since these have been discussed before but the case I will put forward is with regards the Ottoman conquest of Cyprus and how that is described:

'On the fall of Nicosia, the commandant of Kyrenia surrendered without making any defence, and that castle is therefore the only one of the Venetian fortresses that has remained intact to the present day. The remainder of the island, with the exception of Famagusta, followed the example of Kyrenia and submitted to the Turkish forces. '

This is all factual, but fails to mention why these places surrendered so readily. One reson was the execution of thousands of Nicosians after the fall of Nicosia, the news of which travelled to Kyrenia. In addition the event surrounding the surrender of Bragadino:

'The same evening General Bragadino with his principal officers rode out of the city to the pavilion of the pasha, where they were received with great courtesy. Having laid aside their arms, they were introduced into the presence of Lala Mustafa Pasha, who conversed with them for some time. Unfortunately a dispute arose. Mustafa demanded hostages for the safe return of his ships and, when Bragadino refused to go beyond the terms of capitulation, the Pasha accused him of having put to death certain Turkish prisoners-of-war. Bragadino’s reply so enraged Mustafa that he declared the terms of capitulation to have been broken and ordered the whole party to be executed forthwith, with the General Bragadino reserved for the worst fate. After a fortnight of imprisonment, he was bound to the pillory in the square of Famagusta, and killed.'

The site does at least describe the whole chain of events but fails to explain what the dispute was about and how a seemingly diplomatic meeting turned into a massacre which even by the standards of those days was extremely barbaric. The details of Bragadino's execution are also not mentioned. Having read many sources, the reason for the Pasha's fury was the fact that Famagusta had held out as long as it had. The Pasha felt that Bragadino had tricked him into the terms they agreed and into believing that there were more soldiers garrisoned within the walls than there actually were. This is what really enraged him and explains why Bragadino and his entire entourage were executed despite been un-armed and meeting under diplomatic circumstances.

Perhaps given how long the Pasha laid seige to Famagusta, his rage was understandable but most historians agree that his actions after the surrender of Famagusta were far from noble. There is no reason I can see why a TRNC website should fail to describe these facts in detail other than to paint the Ottoman conquerors in a good light.

This is one example. I think it is understandable that a historical site like this should promote the TC point of view regarding recent events. But events that are as far back as 1571 and which are not subject to dispute should be described acurately and although the account above does not at any point lie, it omits certain facts and plays down the barbarity of the Ottoman conquest. It should be said that most of the crimes commited by the Ottoman forces were against the Venetian population rather than the Greek one and that the Greeks on the whole were not treated as badly.

Anyways, this thread is about a particular website and that is what I have commented on, but despite all this it should be noted that there also exist GC websites that similarly attach interpretations to events to promote the GC point of view.[/quote]

[reportfromcyprus]

That's very balanced, Alexis.

I've found that the best way to establish facts is to have a couple of different and reputable sources and to watch out for rhetoric and bias.

Institutions in particular like to lay down the law as if there's no other interpretation of the facts than their own

Truth is, you'll rarely find interpretations agreeing, but you can establish a chain of factual events if you look at different sources.

[Alexis]

Truth is, you'll rarely find interpretations agreeing, but you can establish a chain of factual events if you look at different sources.

That is very true. Even in the case of the Pasha there are differing accounts as to why he was so enraged by Bragadino. We weren't there so our knowledge of exactly how events transpired is constrained by the bias of the sources that made up the history books. By definition every source has some kind of bias attached to it, so more than one source is required to get a true picture of what happened.

[kookookaachoo]

So basically, the Greeks tried to wipe the Turks who were living in Cyprus from the face of the Earth? Turkey steps in, and it's deemed illegal?

So why wasn't it brought to the attention of the rest of the world what the Greeks were doing? I believe the British wouldn't help Turkey out so Turkey went alone?

The things I read are very confusing. I've read more of this 'Turkish propagnda' than the 'Greek Truth' but that's the jist of the story I get.

I apologise in advance for my questions, I realise people must have gone over this a lot but people like Viewpoint seem to explain it much better than reading it from another website.

[rolo]

So why wasn't it brought to the attention of the rest of the world what the Greeks were doing? I believe the British wouldn't help Turkey out so Turkey went alone?

well not quite t-h-a-t simple.


the way i see it is:

in 63 an attempt to evoke a turkish uprising was implemented by enosis supporters. These people hoped that by killing a few turks, the turks would retaliate, the result being a civil war, which
The gcs would win due to greater number and being better equipped. This civil war was to be over within a few days and was then to be proclaimed as a turkish cypriot uprising.

However it never amounted to that - there were a few hundred killed, but as a result of which tcs distanced themselves from any further eoka violence. Many left their homes and lived in "enclaves". Their government reps withdrew from public office; they had little contact with the outside world, and basically no representation. There was no official tc mouthpiece to tell the world of their plight. They were second class citizens and there is no doubt about that.


Now to say that the gcs tried to wipe out tc is totally wrong. In fact the reason that Athens plotted the 74 coup was because Makarios had NOT wiped out the tcs and proclaimed Enosis.


Makarios was a shrewed and very intelligent man. Why wipe out the tcs and evoke a Turkish invasion. Although a turkish invasion seemed to be unthinkable at the time, even tcs had given up hope of the turkish army ever coming, Makarios still regarded Turkey's involvement as a serious threat. So not wanting to give the Turks any reason for invasion but still wanting pan gc control of cyprus with tcs as a minority, he embarked on a more civil and longer term solution to his tc problem.


There was an ideal that by keeping tcs frustrated, in their enclaves, making their lives tough, breaking their morale the tcs would have little choice but to leave cyprus altogether in order to better themselves. It has been claimed that GCS even paid for one way flights off cyprus for any tc leaving cyprus and not coming back.


let’s get this into perspective tcs were not slaves to gc. Neither community really mixed, except perhaps in a few rural mixed villages. Both had separate economies if you like. The gc with access to outside markets prospered, whilst tc's access to the outside world was through the gc controlled ports.

the tc economy was maintained by money from Turkey, however the cheque apparently was always held up in the post. The post -office was of course run by the gcs, as was the airport, the national guard, the government. The long term Makarios plan was ethnic cleansing of tc through political means - dont kill any tcs coz Turkey might invade, but instead demoralise them and they'll leave by their own accord. Legal ethnic-cleansing, if there was such a thing. Extreme power based political correctness gone mad.

had the Makarios plan continued then by now and with the Eu the tc population would be about a half of what it is, many would certainly have left, although it could be argued that cyprus would never have gained entry to Eu under pre 74 conditions.

Look the world did know what was going on, but they had no power to intervene. Technically apart from a few attacks, which were put down to civil unrest The gc were smart enough not to be too ruthless or interpreted the constitution in a way that justified their actions.


Let me quote from the then British PM Sir Alex Douglas-Hume:

"Unless Makarios can bring himself to treat the turkish Cypriots as human beings he is inviting partition"
so please dont tell me the world never knew, plus added to that the stigmas of war-mongering terrible turks, crusades, and rival empires and that the greeks were the first European civilisation, they taught the world democracy, poetry and all things nice, like flower arranging - (ok ok) well you get my drift.

The world did know what was happening on cyprus in the 60-74. But let me ask you did you or any other European country with all your high morals and regard for human rights ever give a fig about what happened to a hundred thousand or so turkish Cypriots? Did you fig.
US did not want a to split nato’s eatern flank i.e Turkey and Greece. Britain had just got over Suez and Aden.

Let me ask did you bombard your MP over the Rowanda genocide, did you protest, or write to any newspaper? if you did you are rare.



ah i could go on and on about why we came to this situation, and of course the usual gc culprits will respond with the usual 3500 years of Greek slavery, and ottoman oppressions, turkish propaganda, excuses and the usual. This present situation is a consequence of the only ever, world recognised independent Cyprus govt 60-74. The gcs had two thirds power but that wasn’t enough for them. The nature of democracy is the elected govt is accountable for all outcomes. The buck stops there.

Eventually it was Athens who provided the excuse for Turkey to invade and secure a safe haven for the tcs. After the invasion some tcs fleeing to the north had to escape from the south under gc machine gun fire, others were caught and killed. Dont tell me this is not so - i do know of some.

The world leaders knew, and so did the news reporters, but nobody did anything. It wasnt their problem.

I believe the British wouldn't help Turkey out so Turkey went alone?

yup u believe correct sir.

[Piratis]

So basically, the Greeks tried to wipe the Turks who were living in Cyprus from the face of the Earth?

See, that is what happens when you read a misleading time line like the one you posted. The question is why exactly you posted that one, and not another one, and if you are here to actually ask questions or try to promote the Turkish propaganda by posting Turkish propaganda websites.

I will not post you the time line from a Greek Cypriot source as I am sure you will immediately regard it as biased, something that for some "strange" reason did not happen when you posted the one from the Turkish Cypriot source (if I am wrong with my assumption correct me)

I will however post you a time line from a USA source, still your own guys and still biased towards the Turks, but at least they are not trying to skew reality to the extend that your propaganda source did.

So, you talked about GCs trying to "wipe out" the Turks. Can you please tell me how you came to that conclusion? I guess it is easy to come to the conclusions you want to come, isn't it? Are you a friend of Bakala by any chance?

Here is who tried to wipe out whom:

http://rs6.loc.gov/frd/cs/cytoc.html (USA Library of Congress)

Throughout the period of Venetian rule, Ottoman Turks raided and attacked at will. In 1489, the first year of Venetian control, Turks attacked the Karpas Peninsula, pillaging and taking captives to be sold into slavery. In 1539 the Turkish fleet attacked and destroyed Limassol. Fearing the ever-expanding Ottoman Empire, the Venetians had fortified Famagusta, Nicosia, and Kyrenia, but most other cities were easy prey.

In the summer of 1570, the Turks struck again, but this time with a full-scale invasion rather than a raid. About 60,000 troops, including cavalry and artillery, under the command of Lala Mustafa Pasha landed unopposed near Limassol on July 2, 1570, and laid siege to Nicosia. In an orgy of victory on the day that the city fell--September 9, 1570--20,000 Nicosians were put to death, and every church, public building, and palace was looted. Word of the massacre spread, and a few days later Mustafa took Kyrenia without having to fire a shot. Famagusta, however, resisted and put up a heroic defense that lasted from September 1570 until August 1571.

In the intercommunal conflict a few 100s of both TCs and GCs had been killed between 63 and 68. The conflict was mostly over by 68 and most TCs came out of the enclaves. So where did you see an attempt of GCs to "wipe out" TCs?

In 1974 no TC was killed until after the Turkish invasion had started. A few 100s of TCs were killed during the invasion as a retaliation to the 6000 GC victims of the Turkish invasion. The invasion didn't happen to save the TCs, but to occupy part of Cyprus. This was clear very soon after when the coup had fallen and democracy returned in both Greece and Cyprus, but the Turks instead of withdrawing they continued with a second invasion to occupy even more land.
That excuse (of protecting the TCs) has expired 32 years ago, and anybody that still can not see the real reason behind the Turkish invasion is intentionally keeping his eyes shut.

[Natty]

Hey, I don't think it's very fair to say that the Greek Cypriots plan was to 'genocide' the Turkish Cypriots. In all the sources I've read, only one being from a GC, the fighting that occured between the years, 1963-67, (or even in 1958) has always been described as inter-communal fighting, and nothing else. When I look at the facts and figures from that period, it just doesn't make sense to me, that people can use such a strong word like 'genocide' to describe what happened....Please don't get me wrong, I don't deny that the Turkish Cypriots suffered during that period, but I don't believe that it was ever one sided, and that the Greek Cypriots just decided one day that they hated all TC's and wanted them dead...The evidence, in my eyes, just doesn't back up the claim...(if that makes sense..)

I found this from that page Pirates found, I think to a certain extent it kinda shows what happened...The interesting thing is that, in no paragraph does it mention the word 'genocide'...

Cyprus
Intercommunal Violence
The atmosphere on the island was tense. On December 21, 1963, serious violence erupted in Nicosia when a Greek Cypriot police patrol, ostensibly checking identification documents, stopped a Turkish Cypriot couple on the edge of the Turkish quarter. A hostile crowd gathered, shots were fired, and two Turkish Cypriots were killed. As the news spread, members of the underground organizations began firing and taking hostages. North of Nicosia, Turkish forces occupied a strong position at St. Hilarion Castle, dominating the road to Kyrenia on the northern coast. The road became a principal combat area as both sides fought to control it. Much intercommunal fighting occurred in Nicosia along the line separating the Greek and Turkish quarters of the city (known later as the Green Line). Turkish Cypriots were not concentrated in one area, but lived throughout the island, making their position precarious. Vice-President Küçük and Turkish Cypriot ministers and members of the House of Representatives ceased participating in the government.

In January 1964, after an inconclusive conference in London among representatives of Britain, Greece, Turkey, and the two Cypriot communities, UN Secretary General U Thant, at the request of the Cyprus government, sent a special representative to the island. After receiving a firsthand report in February, the Security Council authorized a peace-keeping force under the direction of the secretary general. Advance units reached Cyprus in March, and by May the United Nations Peace-keeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP) totaled about 6,500 troops. Originally authorized for a three-month period, the force, at decreased strength, was still in position in the early 1990s.

Severe intercommunal fighting occurred in March and April 1964. When the worst of the fighting was over, Turkish Cypriots--sometimes of their own volition and at other times forced by the TMT--began moving from isolated rural areas and mixed villages into enclaves......

Something which I recently found out, something which is never mentioned, was that during that period, some Greek Cypriots were also displaced, although perhaps not on the scale of the Turkish Cypriots, who were the numerical minority......

Peace!

[Viewpoint]

Piratis and Natty what you have to try and understand it that although the genocide of the Turkish Cypriots was unsuccessful this does not mean that it was not a real threat against a smaller weaker community. If you talk to the older folks who lived through those bad times, the threat was very real. The enosis threat meant that they had to fight for their existence when GCs were fighting to become Greece. The atmosphere from 63 onwards was one of division and not unity and GC took control of the running of the country and pushed for enosis the TC now in direct reaction to enosis and with the current division pushed for taksim. The threat of annihilation came with the fear of becoming Greece, what would happen to the the TC they would be gotten rid as they were in the path of the GC dream. The coup was another real fear for TCs, you keep claiming that no TCs was killed but you do not have any hard evidence to back this claim, the TCs felt they were on the verge of enosis=annihilation and their only hope of saviour from annihilation was Turkey coming to save them. The declaration by Samson that it would only be a matter of hours before there would be no TCs left on the island was very real, you have to give credit to this far weaker community who from 1963 onwards was just fighting for survival from genocide. The fact that it did not happen does not detract from the threat of it being carried out.

I know its a difficult pill to swallow but it was very real to those TC who lived through those dark years of our terrible past.

[unique_earthling]

i believe that it was true as i know someone who was there in the capacity of british correspondant for the newspapers and he has said that the Turkish cypriots were starved in their enclaves and that the GC government wanted them out of the way as they didnt want to share power and wanted cyprus to be part of greeceand totally greek in all its ethnicity.. so i say deal with it and find out more for your selves. Because i would put money on the fact it is true.. read news archives from that time and you will get a more ballanced picture than the one you have got now with the propaganda..