Cyprus-Forum.com

[boulio]

1)weak asnwer,again the treaty of lausaune labels them muslim minority,if the european court tommorow says they are a turkish minority then they are a turkish minority.

2)officially no they have not,what are the offical languages of turkey?guess what just one, turkish.the muslims of thrace have schools,mosqes and are allowed to were tradtinol dress and headscarves as well,how many kurdish schools are in the se turkey?how many greek schools are in istanbul,actually how many greeks are left in istanbul and imvoz,and tenedos which the treaty of lausaune supposedly protected and the turkish govt. violated.why is halki closed?is it not also a national security concern for turkey?

3)within the borders of turkey?no it is turkey that advocates the double standard that the trnc can have there own country but the kurds cannot.even within the a federal iraq they do not want the north to be kurdish,why is that.

4)so you are admiting that turkey is not a democratic country since the not all citizens dont have the same rights?

and everything that greece does within the letter of the law does deserve my full support.

[mehmet]

1) I know what the treaty of lausanne says. But you said they were Pomaks and muslim Gypsies. So what language is the first language of these people.

2) look I don't come here pretending everything in Turkey is perfect. As far as I'm aware the position of the Kurds in Turkey needs improving.

3) Yes, the Kurdish people should be entitled to their own state which if they wish can include the Kurdish regions of Syria, Iran and Iraq also. Are you now clear about that. Don't talk to me about double standards.

$) Yes again I admit Turkey isn't perfect. Now tell me again what language do these muslims speak and why can't they call themselves Turkish if they wish?

[turkcyp]

the only minorities that turkey recognizes is that of christian minorities.

Dear boulio,

Then may be Turkey should start calling The Greeks, Armenians in Turkey as Christian Turks.

Because The same Lousane treaty you are talkingabout does not say Armenians or Turks but christians living in Turkey.

Now do you understant what I am saying. If these people want to call themselves there is a reason for it. And you should respect that and call them that way as well.

The same thing applies to Kurds in Turkey. If they are calling themselves Kurds then Turkey should accept them as Kurds, not "mountain Turks" as has been suggested in 60s.

that is our point,

Nothing else nothing more,

[boulio]

if the treaty is amended as i stated above and they are called turks,pomaks,or anything else that is fine but my argument is within the letter of the law greece is correct.

pomaks speak a slavo-bulgarian language that is however not written,they attend turkish schools or greek schools in thrace.which every of there choosing.muslim roma speak greek,but identify themselves with the turks of thrace.

[boulio]

turkcyp,

turkey considers them turkish nationals and groups them a religious minoirity,greece considers them greek citizens and groups them as a religious minority,just like the treaty says.

[magikthrill]

The Hellenic Republic refuses to accept the name Turkish of these citizens because as it stated it would cause a security threat. Maybe if Turkey would stop violating my country's air space, we wouldn't feel as threatened.

[turkcyp]

turkcyp,

turkey considers them turkish nationals and groups them a religious minoirity,greece considers them greek citizens and groups them as a religious minority,just like the treaty says.

The ethnicity and citizenship are quite different things you know.,

These people never claimed that they are citizens of republic of Turkey. they only claimed that they are Turkish citizens of Greece. Just like some Greek being a Greek citizen of Turkey, or Greek citizen of USA, or Greek citizen of UK, etc. etc.

The Hellenic Republic refuses to accept the name Turkish of these citizens because as it stated it would cause a security threat. Maybe if Turkey would stop violating my country's air space, we wouldn't feel as threatened.

Apples and oranges,

So when Turkish goverment expropriated many of the Greek properties in Turkey in the sixties naming national security reasons then they were right. or when US goverment put all its Japanese citizens into camps during the second world war. You are saying that was justified as well.

Is this what you are saying.

You are giving an example that shows hostility between two countries. In a civilized country this should not affect the way state related to its own citizens.

The example you are giving is a claim of territory between two coutries, and it can be solved in different ways, a) bad way, war b) good way, third party arbitration like UN, international court of justice etc OR c) never solved an keep on lingering on creating hostility between countries.

But in no time the hostility between two country justifies how a country treats its own citizens of the other country origin. It is simply not civilised.

Among anybody, you Greeks who put the "C" into civilization should now this. I keep on saying one thing. Start living upto the heritage of your societies deep history.

Have a good day,

[Piratis]

Turkey is using the Muslim minorities in neighboring countries in order to expand herself.
You can not deny this because the example of Cyprus talks for itself. If the example of Cyprus did not exist, then I wouldn't see a problem if the Muslims in Greece called themselves Turks. But because now we know what the Turks are all about, the Greek state is forced to take measures to counter the Turkish expansionism.

I really wonder how can some people expect from Greece and Cyprus to treat Turks in the best way possible, while Turkey continues to occupy Cyprus and has claims over the Aegean!!! Don't they see that if they are hostile, hostility is what they will get in return?

[turkcyp]

Turkey is using the Muslim minorities in neighboring countries in order to expand herself.
You can not deny this because the example of Cyprus talks for itself. If the example of Cyprus did not exist, then I wouldn't see a problem if the Muslims in Greece called themselves Turks. But because now we know what the Turks are all about, the Greek state is forced to take measures to counter the Turkish expansionism.

I really wonder how can some people expect from Greece and Cyprus to treat Turks in the best way possible, while Turkey continues to occupy Cyprus and has claims over the Aegean!!! Don't they see that if they are hostile, hostility is what they will get in return?

I guess the next thing you will argue is there is no Turks in Cyprus but simply muslim Cypriots.

My gosh, what an ignorance!!!

[Piratis]

What I argued about is that enemies should be treated as such. I guess you missed my point.