Cyprus-Forum.com

[Jerry]

they can have 12% and build a large wall.

Yes, 12% should be more than enough to realise Turkey's ambition for a base "to protect its southern flank" from bankrupt Greece.

[Jerry]

Is it not time to try something else ?

Regrettably it's too late in my opinion, the colonisation that the majority of TCs have embraced has, to a large extent, made the situation irreversable. It's a question now of how much you will give back in return for recognition by the ROC and consequently the international community.

Do you think your leadership or even the wider GC community is ready to make such a deal ? On any % returned ?

Maybe in 10 or 20 years time but a lot depends on what is happening in Turkey, its relations with the US and EU. One day we will witness the collision of the realities on the ground with the application of international law, the outcome is anyone's guess.

[Oceanside50]

You know very well that most GCs gave up on Enosis years ago. Even Makarios said it had brought trouble to the island,

Its not about having given up on it today its about understanding and accepting today why it was such a mistaken then - and how many GC do that ?

how about giving up on Taksim in reply - you can't can you? You are now "Turkish", you have got more than your fair share of Cyprus and you don't want to give it up.

Do you mean me personally or the TC community ? Personally I would give up taksim but not if it simply means a return to the pre 74 status quo amongst a GC community that does not understand and accept why enosis and the way it was pursued then was a 'bad choice' then. I do not think the TC community is actually that different either but I might be wrong there. Personally I have never considered or called myself 'Turkish'. Cypriot - yes, TC - yes but just Turkish - no not ever.

"Both communities fucked up in Cyprus" your right there, but you can't bring yourself to admit that they "fucked up" in equal measure.

Actually I was very careful to say 'to some degree'. In many ways and at many levels I totally accept both communities were equally to blame. For example both communities equally allowed their respective extremists, absolutist and down right thuggish elements drive the agendas of those communities. I just also happen to believe that the GC had more ability to avert disaster by making the 'right choices' than the TC did and in that sense alone I say they therefore can be said to carry more blame but its a small thing really in that in actuality neither community made the 'right choices'.

Turkey used your presence on the island to fuck the Greek Cypriots and now its doing the same to you, you need to decide if you want to be Cypriots or Turks but it's probably too late.

And you could just as easily and accurately say Turkey used your attempt to try and impose enosis in Cyprus in the name of unitary Cypriot people that enosis also said did not exist to fuck all Cypriots. It is no more or less true than your statement, yet somehow I do not think you accept and understand this as you do the former.

Whatever you may think I actually personally believe in the concept and ideal of a unitary Cypriot people and nation. However such an ideal can not be achieved in isolation, of individuals or communities. Every time I am told 'TC had no right to resist enosis' or 'the Cyprus problem is simply a result of thieving TC trying to take more than they are due' or 'Good riddance to bad rubbish' or any number of other common themes from certain members of this forum, it just makes it harder for me to see and believe we can actually achieve this ideal in my lifetime. I understand and accept how the pursuit of taksim then was a 'bad choice' on the part of my community and therefore I am part of the hope for Cyprus in the future. Can you say likewise about enosis THEN and also be part of the hope for Cyprus in the future ? Or can you only define the issue in terms of Turkish presence in Cyprus and the need for it to be removed in order for there to be a solution ?

Extremism, absolutism, dogma and propaganda are what has got us where we are today and failed to find any settlement for well over 50 years now. Is it not time to try something else ?

...and the same propaganda the older generation used to fuck up Cyprus continues to fuck up the future, as evident here on this forum

[Get Real!]

they can have 12% and build a large wall.

Yes, 12% should be more than enough to realise Turkey's ambition for a base "to protect its southern flank" from bankrupt Greece.

Never! Not even a pebble.

I’ve seen enough, read enough, and heard enough to realize by now that they will forever be a nuisance to Cyprus regardless of that percentage so 0% and the repatriation of the WHOLE LOT back to Turkey is the ONLY guarantee of peace for Cyprus and its native people.

I have met only a handful (literally) that are civilized enough and peaceful enough to qualify as worthy Cypriot citizens but the overwhelming majority are an abhorrent bunch of utterly incompatible Islamo-fascist peasants, to the spirit of Cyprus.

Those who may argue as to how that can be achieved I say to you that it can be achieved in the same way and in the same time frame as any of all the other absurd “solutions” that have been mentioned, if not sooner.


I used to be a “18%” supporter, over time shifted to a “12%” supporter and now it’s a big ZERO from me! Sorry.

[Lordo]

thats ironic really because zero per cent is exactly what you are getting back. but worst of all, once terkey opens her ports to you and you to them, they will buy you out lock stock and barrel.

and walla you will be under ottomans one more time but this time forever if you can stand to live there under such circumstances.

[Oceanside50]

they can have 12% and build a large wall.

Yes, 12% should be more than enough to realise Turkey's ambition for a base "to protect its southern flank" from bankrupt Greece.

Never! Not even a pebble.

I’ve seen enough, read enough, and heard enough to realize by now that they will forever be a nuisance to Cyprus regardless of that percentage so 0% and the repatriation of the WHOLE LOT back to Turkey is the ONLY guarantee of peace for Cyprus and its native people.

I have met only a handful (literally) that are civilized enough and peaceful enough to qualify as worthy Cypriot citizens but the overwhelming majority are an abhorrent bunch of utterly incompatible Islamo-fascist peasants, to the spirit of Cyprus.

Those who may argue as to how that can be achieved I say to you that it can be achieved in the same way and in the same time frame as any of all the other absurd “solutions” that have been mentioned, if not sooner.


I used to be a “18%” supporter, over time shifted to a “12%” supporter and now it’s a big ZERO from me! Sorry.

at least the nipplehead is saying the truth of what the GC want and wanted in the past

[Sotos]

I see the point you are trying to make and I am telling you it is FALSE. If it was true then the Greek minority in Turkey and every other ethnic minority in every other country would have a self determination right. And in many cases we are talking about minorities who are the native people in their countries not recent invaders like yourself... and they still don't get any separate self-determination right! If it was like that then every ethnic minority... which doesn't even have a separate territory of its own... would commit ethnic cleansing so they can take part of the country just for themselves and do what they wish in it.... NO ... you DO NOT have any such right PERIOD. And who told you that enosis would not have international support? It is just that the British colonizers, who are members of the UN security council, would not allow it to pass from the UN.

No you still do not get it, which is as expected. You can say it is false that there is an inherent paradox in claiming ENOSIS as an expression of the free will of a unitary Cypriot people, when ENOSIS itself denies the very existence of that unitary people, but saying it does not make the paradox disappear. It is there and it is real despite your denials. You in fact, as an individual here, are more 'honest' - in that you make it clear that in your view the TC community should have had (and have) no rights to any say over Cyprus' future because they are just invaders'. Your leadership knew that such an honest argument that TC should simply have no say over their own futures in Cyprus because they were just invaders, would never be accepted, not by the leaving Colonial rulers, the wider world community or Turkey. So they instead tried the 'paradox' approach, which also failed in the end at great cost. It is ENOSIS, claimed as an expression of the right to self determination of a unitary Cypriot people, that makes Cyprus different from other places with ethnic monitories in them post colonisation. It is ENOSIS that in effected promoted the TC community into something more than just an ethnic minority.

What the fuck is "unitary Cypriot people". There are those that ARE Cypriot people and those who AREN'T. Our leadership never claimed that the enosis aim represented the Turkish minority, only the native Cypriot people who are the MAJORITY. And nobody said that the Turkish minority should have no say. You don't need to be native to have a say. But your say should be as much as the say of anybody else. One person ONE vote. Why should your Turkish minority have more say than the majority?

Had you not been trying to screw us and respected DEMOCRACY and MAJORITY RULE then we would also respect your MINORITY RIGHTS.

You have to know that is not true. You only have to look at how ethnic minorities, especially those of Turkish origin have been treated in Greece between 1960 and today, to know that is not true. You only have to look at your own posts, where you repeatedly argue that TC are not 'true' Cypriots, but just left over invaders and colonisers to know that is not true.

Far better than Turkey treats its Greek minority. And my own posts say only the truth... how is the truth no respect for your minority rights? As far as I know there is no minority right to be called native!

Everybody everywhere arrived as settlers at some point. But time is critical here. The English went to Britain 1500 years ago... thats enough to make them natives there by now. But they can not be called natives in the places they colonized the last few centuries... unless those places were uninhabited or something.

Are you serious ? When did Europeans settle in North America ? In Australia ? In South America ? In Africa ?

Google it. About the same time when the Turks colonized Cyprus.

[erolz66]

What the fuck is "unitary Cypriot people". There are those that ARE Cypriot people and those who AREN'T. Our leadership never claimed that the enosis aim represented the Turkish minority, only the native Cypriot people who are the MAJORITY. And nobody said that the Turkish minority should have no say. You don't need to be native to have a say. But your say should be as much as the say of anybody else. One person ONE vote. Why should your Turkish minority have more say than the majority?

The right to self determination applies to 'peoples' - look it up. Not countries, not nations, not geographical regions. It is the fundamental human right from which all others derive. With enosis GC said they were part of some other 'people' (the Greek people) and thus defined the TC as part of some other 'people' than the GC. It is that very definition that grants them a separate and equal right to self determination as a different people, regardless of them being smaller numerically. If GC had chosen to define themselves as part of a unitary Cypriot 'people' inclusive of TC then there would be not seperate right to self determination for TC. That is why enosis was such a 'fucked up' choice because enosis defined us as separate 'peoples'. That you also wanted to have your cake (define us as separate peoples) and also eat the cake (deny that TC had any right to self determination having already defined them as separate peoples) was just a fuck up on a fuck up. That is exactly the point I am making and that you will steadfastly refuse to see or accept.

Had you not been trying to screw us and respected DEMOCRACY and MAJORITY RULE then we would also respect your MINORITY RIGHTS.

You have to know that is not true. You only have to look at how ethnic minorities, especially those of Turkish origin have been treated in Greece between 1960 and today, to know that is not true. You only have to look at your own posts, where you repeatedly argue that TC are not 'true' Cypriots, but just left over invaders and colonisers to know that is not true.

Far better than Turkey treats its Greek minority. And my own posts say only the truth... how is the truth no respect for your minority rights? As far as I know there is no minority right to be called native!

You claimed if we had just shut up and let enosis be imposed on us in our own shared homeland against our will that 'our minority rights' would have been respected. You only have to look at the repeated violations by Greece of the minority rights of ethnic Turks who live in Greece to know that is not the case. I can quote countless credible documents that record the abuse of the minority rights of ethnic Turks living in Greece from the 1960 to present day - but you will still choose to believe that which is convenient for you to believe regardless.

Everybody everywhere arrived as settlers at some point. But time is critical here. The English went to Britain 1500 years ago... thats enough to make them natives there by now. But they can not be called natives in the places they colonized the last few centuries... unless those places were uninhabited or something.

Are you serious ? When did Europeans settle in North America ? In Australia ? In South America ? In Africa ?

Google it. About the same time when the Turks colonized Cyprus.

Exactly. So according to your arbitrary definition above, Americans of European descent, Australians, South Americans, Africans etc etc - none of those can consider themselves native to the countries they live in today and their families have lived in for generations but are in fact just 'colonisers' and should have no say in the future of those countries as colonisers - nor will they get such 'status' for another 1000 years. Fuckwit.

[Paphitis]

What the fuck is "unitary Cypriot people". There are those that ARE Cypriot people and those who AREN'T. Our leadership never claimed that the enosis aim represented the Turkish minority, only the native Cypriot people who are the MAJORITY. And nobody said that the Turkish minority should have no say. You don't need to be native to have a say. But your say should be as much as the say of anybody else. One person ONE vote. Why should your Turkish minority have more say than the majority?

The right to self determination applies to 'peoples' - look it up. Not countries, not nations, not geographical regions. It is the fundamental human right from which all others derive. With enosis GC said they were part of some other 'people' (the Greek people) and thus defined the TC as part of some other 'people' than the GC. It is that very definition that grants them a separate and equal right to self determination as a different people, regardless of them being smaller numerically. If GC had chosen to define themselves as part of a unitary Cypriot 'people' inclusive of TC then there would be not seperate right to self determination for TC. That is why enosis was such a 'fucked up' choice because enosis defined us as separate 'peoples'. That you also wanted to have your cake (define us as separate peoples) and also eat the cake (deny that TC had any right to self determination having already defined them as separate peoples) was just a fuck up on a fuck up. That is exactly the point I am making and that you will steadfastly refuse to see or accept.

Completely correct Erolz!

These rights are actually fundamental International Law: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-determination

However, it still does not give Turkey the right to invade, control and colonize a fully independent and recognized member nation of the UN.

What is evident though is how so many forumers here can be so stupid to promote to separate peoples on our island. Sotos, Kurupetos, Yialousa and Oracle, you better lift your socks because you are all playing into Turkey's hands. Maybe Turkey should give you all a medal of service!

Had you not been trying to screw us and respected DEMOCRACY and MAJORITY RULE then we would also respect your MINORITY RIGHTS.

You have to know that is not true. You only have to look at how ethnic minorities, especially those of Turkish origin have been treated in Greece between 1960 and today, to know that is not true. You only have to look at your own posts, where you repeatedly argue that TC are not 'true' Cypriots, but just left over invaders and colonisers to know that is not true.

Far better than Turkey treats its Greek minority. And my own posts say only the truth... how is the truth no respect for your minority rights? As far as I know there is no minority right to be called native!

Actually Erolz, the Turkish minority is treated quite well in Greece these days. They are thriving and most would prefer to remain as Greek Citizens.

You claimed if we had just shut up and let enosis be imposed on us in our own shared homeland against our will that 'our minority rights' would have been respected. You only have to look at the repeated violations by Greece of the minority rights of ethnic Turks who live in Greece to know that is not the case. I can quote countless credible documents that record the abuse of the minority rights of ethnic Turks living in Greece from the 1960 to present day - but you will still choose to believe that which is convenient for you to believe regardless.

To be fair, I don't believe there are any violations against the Turkish Community in Thrace. There may have been in the past but certainly nothing like that today.

Everybody everywhere arrived as settlers at some point. But time is critical here. The English went to Britain 1500 years ago... thats enough to make them natives there by now. But they can not be called natives in the places they colonized the last few centuries... unless those places were uninhabited or something.

Are you serious ? When did Europeans settle in North America ? In Australia ? In South America ? In Africa ?

Google it. About the same time when the Turks colonized Cyprus.

Exactly. So according to your arbitrary definition above, Americans of European descent, Australians, South Americans, Africans etc etc - none of those can consider themselves native to the countries they live in today and their families have lived in for generations but are in fact just 'colonisers' and should have no say in the future of those countries as colonisers - nor will they get such 'status' for another 1000 years. Fuckwit.

I really don't think Sotos knows what he is talking about!

[Get Real!]

The right to self determination applies to 'peoples' - look it up. Not countries, not nations, not geographical regions. It is the fundamental human right from which all others derive. With enosis GC said they were part of some other 'people' (the Greek people) and thus defined the TC as part of some other 'people' than the GC. It is that very definition that grants them a separate and equal right to self determination as a different people, regardless of them being smaller numerically. If GC had chosen to define themselves as part of a unitary Cypriot 'people' inclusive of TC then there would be not seperate right to self determination for TC. That is why enosis was such a 'fucked up' choice because enosis defined us as separate 'peoples'. That you also wanted to have your cake (define us as separate peoples) and also eat the cake (deny that TC had any right to self determination having already defined them as separate peoples) was just a fuck up on a fuck up. That is exactly the point I am making and that you will steadfastly refuse to see or accept.

Baloney!

Is the “TRNC” a Turkish Cypriot right to self-determination?


Article 1 of the “International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights” adopted by the UN General Assembly in December 1966 says…

“1. All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development. “

http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm

The covenant goes on to expand on this right in more detail in the articles that follow, but leaves a very vague sense of any limitations to it rendering the covenant an open invitation to social renegades and hostile groups to just rise up and claim independence!

Of course, self-determination is a complex concept with conflicting definitions and legal criteria for determining which groups may legitimately claim it! Therefore, the UN has since made numerous amends to this open-ended invitation to correct the problem including in their 1984…


General Comment No. 12: The right to self-determination of peoples

“2. Article 1 enshrines an inalienable right of all peoples as described in its paragraphs 1 and 2. By virtue of that right they freely "determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development". The article imposes on all States parties corresponding obligations. This right and the corresponding obligations concerning its implementation are interrelated with other provisions of the Covenant and rules of international law.”

http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/0/f3c9 ... endocument

It’s important to note that the UN uses the word “peoples” which means the human beings of a particular nation or electorate, and it also makes very clear who the offender is…

“peoples under colonial, foreign or alien occupation”

…being Turkey, and…

“acts or threats of foreign military intervention and occupation that are threatening to suppress, or have already suppressed”

Both of the above statements apply to Cyprus currently under the illegal occupation of Turkey, but obviously not to the Turkish Cypriots!

The right of self-determination is that of countries or “peoples” as the UN refers to them, but when it comes to the rights of ethnic groups such as the Turkish Cypriots, then the appropriate charter is that of the…

”Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities”

http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/minorities.htm

It’s obvious that Turkish Cypriots DO NOT have any right to self-determination, but rights as an ethnic minority!


Conclusion:
We can clearly see now that the implementation of self-determination is bound by international law and only applies to nations, so the notion that Turkish Cypriots (a ethnic community) have a right to “self-determination” on Cypriot territory that they along with Turkey, had ethnically cleansed of any Greek Cypriots in July and August of 1974, has no legal standing whatsoever!

It is therefore by no accident that the UN condemned this act via…

UN RESOLUTION 361 (1974)
http://www.un.int/cyprus/scr353.htm

UN RESOLUTION 541 (1983)
http://www.un.int/cyprus/scr541.htm