Cyprus-Forum.com

[Piratis]

There is a significant difference between describing an event differently and denying the event ever took place.

So if we described the event differently it would be ok? So in the same way that you call the criminal invasion a "peace operation" it would be ok to call those killings as "helping people to reach their dreams eternally"? Or would it be even more outrageous?

It isn't just TP (or RD) who doesn't want a solution - I'd say the same thoughts/views from the voters allowed him into a position of power.

Talk for yourself. You have absolutely no clue what we want, so don't act as our representative. People want a democratic solution that will respect human rights and international laws, and thats why they voted for Papadopoulos.

[Bananiot]

Papadopoulos has become a president because AKEL voted for him. As simple as that. In another presidential election, some years ago, when Papadopoulos was the candidate of his party only, he got a meagre 2% of the vote. Perhaps then, the people weren't interested in a "democratic solution that will respect human rights and international laws". Piratis, spare us the patronising, we are not eating gonnara!

[MicAtCyp]

Next question: Why would the GCs vote for someone who they must have known would not be trusted by a minority group and a person who in fact had been involved in the murders of some of the minority group.

Because the GCs know the difference between plagiarism and truth Kismettiri.

Ask Bananiot to tell you if those paramilitary groups were formed to attack the TCs or whether they were formed to protect the State from the undemining of the Eokas, the Ethniko Metopo (National Front) and the teams of Grivas. Ask him to tell you which group did Papadopoulos form as a Minister of Makarios following his instructions,whether Papadopoulos was by any means the leader of that group,or whether that was a legal Police body that exists up to date.
Ask him to tell you why Lyssarides boasts up until today that his own groups were the only ones that actively confronted the coupists in 1974 thus defending the Democratic order.

Everybody knows that the GCs were actually fighting between each other that against the TCs and the TMT during those times....

Papadopoulos did not become President accidentally and with no credentials.The GCs made no mistake. There were hundreds of events in the past when Papadopoulos was the only one who could analyse correctly and objectively the situation on crucial issues compared with other GC politicians.Perhaps the only one with the most correct predictions on crucial issues. I was watching him all along.I was never a supporter of his party or him personally but one day a few years ago while traveling and listening him at a radio interview I remember I thought "damn it, this guy is very good"

I do recognise stubborness and perhaps inflexibility as his major disadvantages. But I personally have a lot of evidence all those years watching him that he has exceptional abilities and judgement.He may use these abilities towards a fair solution to the Cyprus problem or he may stagnate in until enternity serving the interests of some crooks. He has the abilities for both.

PS.Papadopoulos the leader of the Greek Junta, and Tassos Papadopoulos are 2 different persons.

[Piratis]

In another presidential election, some years ago, when Papadopoulos was the candidate of his party only, he got a meagre 2% of the vote. Perhaps then, the people weren't interested in a "democratic solution that will respect human rights and international laws".

When was that?

Here are the results of all presidential elections so far:

http://www.cyprus.gov.cy/cyphome/GovHom ... nguageNo=1

In which presidential elections Papadopoulos was a candidate and got 2%?

[mehmet]

There is a difference to percieving an event to suit your own perspective to good old fashioned lying. How about if I say black people chose to be slaves in USA? Ok, what about saying no Jews suffered during NAZI era? Maybe we can say John F Kennedy is alive? Or perhaps we can say no Turkish Cypriots were killed as a result of inter communal strife between 1963-74.

[Piratis]

How about if I say black people chose to be slaves in USA? Ok, what about saying no Jews suffered during NAZI era? Maybe we can say John F Kennedy is alive?

... or maybe we can say that the criminal Turkish invasion was a peace operation?

Isn't that a lie? Or when the Turkish side uses these kind of lies constantly, in the most official manner is ok, while if we say something a big issue happens?

Notice the fact that I never supported that what is claimed Papadopoulos said is true. Maybe we should all start saying and promoting lies the way the Turkish side does it?

[Bananiot]

Sorry, forgot to add to the list a certain butcher named Nicos Samson. These paramilitary groups did wonders in 1963 onwards and to claim that their job was to tackle EOKA B etc which did not exist then, is an insult to history.

[mehmet]

Yes I notice you didn't support Papadopoulos's claim although you are not saying you believe he made that claim. I wonder what you think you are achieving by taking such a position. I have on several occasionsbeen critical of the actions of the current leadership in the north.

Why you bring up 'Turkish Peace Operation'?. I agree it is a provocation to Greek Cypriots to use it and I don't agree with that.

My original point was how can such Cyprus problem be solved whilst a man such as him, who either believes such nonsense or insists on misepresenting the experiences of Turkish Cypriots, is the leader of RoC?

[Piratis]

Yes I notice you didn't support Papadopoulos's claim although you are not saying you believe he made that claim. I wonder what you think you are achieving by taking such a position.

The only reason i take this position is that while I was searching at Google News before this article was posted, I found an interview of Christofias in that same newspaper by the same reporter. The main title of that story is that Christofias doesn't want a federation. I know very well that this is not the case, and I was very surprised when I read that. Then you post this link of Papadopoulos interview, again in the same newspaper, again very surprising. It really seems a bit strange to me why everybody is saying something different to this newspaper than they usually say everywhere else. So I am a bit suspicious.

In any case, lets say that if Papadopoulos said such thing then it is something I disagree and a minus point for him. If we had several options then we could just take the next one in the line. But what are our options? Cleredes? Anastasiades? Markides? When we vote we vote the best one among limited alternatives. Sometimes we even have to vote the "least bad". Personally I believe that Papadopoulos at this point is way ahead of any of the others. If a better one arises in the future then we will support him. We are not blind funs of any politician.

[erolz]

In any case, lets say that if Papadopoulos said such thing then

Do you not think that if he had not said this thing he or his press office would say so? It has now been reported in Cyprus papers and as far as I know there has been no denial.

it is something I disagree and a minus point for him.

finally !

Personally I believe that Papadopoulos at this point is way ahead of any of the others. If a better one arises in the future then we will support him. We are not blind funs of any politician.

If he is GC 'best choice' for securing a fair settlement that would be agreable to both sides and if (I say if for your benefit) he made the statements that he did - then the prospects of a (fair) settelment under his leadership would seem remote to me. How anyone could expect that a person willing to make such statements would also be able to 'lead' Cyprus to a settlement is beyond me.