Cyprus-Forum.com

[newgeneration]

I came on here lying and scheming. I am lost for words. What on earth have I lied about?

A character assasination because I put forward a view different from your own.

Crazy old man!

[Jerry]

Are there any forum members out there who can present a viable arguement to my post (citing reliable sources of course, as I have been requested to do by you), or are we all in agreement that it is a truthful and fair account?

Look, you have not quoted a reliable source regarding Michael Stephens. The UK parliament may be a reliable source of what someone said but that does not mean that the statement made by Stephens itself is reliable, honest or unbiased. He is well known as an apologist for Turkey and the "trnc". I believe he has property in the north of Cyprus - how unbiased would you expect him to be?

Here's another "unbiased" view by Michael Stephen.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m ... _19420274/

[newgeneration]

I take your point that an individual can easily be biased. But what do you make of the sources he quotes?

In particular, several British newspaper reports of the time, and the direct quotes of Makarios and Sampson.

[newgeneration]

By the way, from what I can see your link is another publication which has printed Michael Stephen's original report. It doesn't really show him up to be unbiased. His report has simply been published in more than one place.

In terms of him owning property in the North. Well it's true he may do, but then again he may not. How could we ever know - land registry details of this nature are confidential. Do you know where or how the rumour started? For example, has he been seen holidaying in the North, has he been seen at meetings with Northern developers, etc? Just wondering if there is a reason why people may think he owns land in the North ...

[Jerry]

I take your point that an individual can easily be biased. But what do you make of the sources he quotes?

In particular, several British newspaper reports of the time, and the direct quotes of Makarios and Sampson.

For a start I do not believe everything I read in the Press, especially a Greek hating one. I remember those times very well, the British press had not forgiven the GCs for the Eoka struggle. Sampson was an arsehole and Makarios was playing to the gallery, rather like Denktash did when he incited riots in Larnaca.

If you can accept the notion that Turkey was determined to regain a foothold in Cyprus after Britain left you will have a much better understanding of why Cyprus is divided. Latent animosities between the two communities were aroused by Turkey for its own ends. The fate of Turkish Cypriots was of secondary importance to Turkey. Don't take my word for it though: -

289. Telegram From the Embassy in Turkey to the Department of State Ankara, November 14, 1958, noon.
Foreseeing that Greece will make major push at UNGA for concept "independence" (Athens telegram 1170),/7/ Embassy wishes restate that basic factor determining Turkish position is need for security of Anatolia with protection Turkish community on Cyprus being given second consideration. "Independence", which provides only "paper" guarantees security Anatolia would not be acceptable GOT. GOT agreed support present UK plan because (1) it committed UK remain on island for at least seven years more, (2) through position of Turkish Government representative GOT obtained foothold on island and (3) HMG agreed to reiteration Lennox-Boyd statement December 19, 1956. Publicly GOT still firmly wedded to thesis "partition"; this thesis continues contain flexibility at least to extent not preventing GOT from agreeing support UK plan. Embassy unable envisage how Greek Government could embellish "independence" so that it would become harmonious with "partition" but was encouraged by Averoff's re-ported approach to Turkish Embassy Athens with request that Turks re-examine concept of independence (Athens telegram 1170 paragraph 3). If possible Embassy feels USG should encourage more such direct Turkish-Greek talks. (Signed Hall)

[newgeneration]

I am also not a supporter of Sampon, Makarios or Denktash.

I can understand the British sympathising with TC's because of EOKA as you mention. There were reports in Italian, Greek and US too however of the same nature. What are your thoughts on those? (some sources below).

In his memoirs, the US Under-Secretary of State, George Ball, said 'Makarios's central interest was to block off Turkish intervention so that he and his Greek Cypriots could go on happily massacring Turkish Cypriots. Obviously we would never permit that'.

On 22nd July Washington Star News reported: 'Bodies littered the streets and there were mass burials . . . People who were told by Makarios to lay down their guns were shot by the National Guard.'

The Greek newspaper Eleftherotipia published an interview with Nicos Sampson on 26th February 1981 in which he said 'Had Turkey not intervened I would not only have proclaimed ENOSIS (annexation to Greece) but I would have annihilated the Turks in Cyprus.'

On 17 February 1964 the Washington Post reported that "Greek Cypriot fanatics appear bent on a policy of genocide." The Greek Cypriot Minister of the Interior admitted that he had controlled the attack in Limassol himself.

Greek Cypriot journalist, Stavros Angelides, wrote in Fileleftheros on 16 September 1990 "With the passage of time we the Greek Cypriots forget, or wilfully disregard, the events which led to the present situation in Cyprus. We forget our faults and we ask all the more emphatically everybody else to deliver to us justice as we understand it. We talk in generalities and in vague terms about UN Resolutions, and actually mean those which favour us. The others, such as Resolution 649 are not fair—we do not want them—let them go to hell."
Yes Turkey may well have been trying to gain a foothold in as much as Greece may have been. Cyprus is very strategically placed after all. I don't discount this.


Re your Telegram source, may I ask where this is from? Would internal Turkish telegrams not be written in Turkish? I'm interested to read the non translated version if one exists and continue down this line of research.

The real issues I want to get to the bottom of however are the events of 1963/64 as I believe they contributed on a grand scale to the events that followed.

In this vein, going back to the Makarios quotes, (some of them below), do you think the GC's and G military did not act on Makarios' wishes then? He was the leader of the GC's at the time, and he had made amendments to constitutions of the agreed joint govt, all of which removed any rights of TC's. Why would he do that if his end game were not to rid Cyprus of all TC's?

In a speech on 4 September 1962, at Panayia, Makarios said "Until this Turkish community forming part of the Turkish race which has been the terrible enemy of Hellenism is expelled, the duty of the heroes of EOKA can never be considered as terminated."

In February 1963 Archbishop Makarios declared on behalf of the Greek Cypriots that if the Court ruled against them they would ignore it. On 25 April 1963 the Court did rule against them and they did ignore it.

Clerides (source: his memiors): "If the Turkish Cypriots resist "unilateral amendments of the Constitution" where their rights would be abrogated, the forces of the Minister of Interior will use force to "put down the uprising". Lt General George Karayiannis (the mainland Greek Army Officer then in command of the Cyprus Army) told Ethnikos Kiryx, an Athens Daily, on 13 June 1965 that "President Makarios decided (a) to proceed to organise the Greek Cypriots for battle and arm them, and (b) to proceed with the revision of the Constitution, including the cancellation of the [Turkish Cypriot] Vice-President's Veto."

"When the Turkish Cypriots objected to the amendment of the constitution Makarios put his plan into effect, and the Greek Cypriot attack began in December 1963"—(Lt Gen Karayiannis) The General is referring to the "Akritas" plan, which was the blueprint for the annihilation of the Turkish Cypriots and the annexation of the island to Greece.

[B25]

You are just regurgitating items from an already discredited source. No matter how many times you say it, it doesn't make it so. memoirs, tell me what are they, oh I know, where previously failed politicians want to spill their guts and past thoughts. Doesn't make any of it true. Quote them all you like if it makes you happy.
The bottom line is the turks were already on the road to destroying the RoC before (as shown by GIGs link) the independence even happend and before any of these alleged incidents took place. We could argue we were acting in self defence after all the TCs were backed by a 70m strong turkey who was already supplying arms , aid and inttelligence to the TCS, TMT in preparation of the conflict. Are you paid by the line or by the post, just wondered!

[newgeneration]

Ah go away B25. My post above was a reply to Jerry.

[tsukoui]

No one has answered my question... is it because you all work for the Crown?

[newgeneration]

That's because your post is incohesive.