Cyprus-Forum.com

[Garavnoss]

As far as "I" have observed [from the hundreds of posts I have either read or subscribed to] the actual "TRUTH" of the matter is so obscure, I very much doubt if it would be recognized were it to march up and deliver members a good kick in the bollocks [or the behind for the Ladies].

Supplying "Links" to whatever report/opinion is forwarded, does not necessarily prove the "Truth" of such whether they be distorted or otherwise, since the sources are invariably manipulated to suit the agency which releases them in the first place.

To quote "Sir Winston Churchill" [and my apologies for once again highlighting his quote] "The TRUTH is such a precious commodity, it must be protected with a bodyguard of LIES"

Coming from a Prime Minister, such an admission SHOULD furnish us all with the certain knowledge that WE [common folk] will never be able to determine the "TRUTH" of any matter, unless we SEE it and EXPERIENCE it for ourselves.

The clever bastards [Theologians] who foresaw that some may be inquisitive, have actually got it covered by relying on one of the more famous quotations of "Jesus Christ" when he is reputed to have said, "Blessed is he that believeth but does not see", it looks like it has all worked out fine for those who manage to pull the wool over our eyes on a daily basis.

It keeps everyone happy as they argue and fight among each other, it also preserves the hatreds that fester in such "Blindness".

I do not think that there is any evidence of distortion, twisting, manipulating [or other] in what I have written, I will not cast a vote since I do not see any real value in deciding WHO may be the more inclined to submit to bias, EVERYONE is at it !.

[Robin Hood]

Erolz66:

So if I may be so bold as to ask, in your opinion

If someone were to describe a source as being from a 'discussion site' and that source was in fact an official EU Commission press release from the official EU Commission website, would the person describing it at such be expressing their own possibly biased opinion or would they be distorting actual truth to suit their agenda ?

IMO: They would be attempting to downgrade the validity of the source and thus represent the facts as being questionable or simply an opinion. Paphitis is always doing this with me and it is a defence mechanism when there is no valid or substantive counter argument. But again IMO, in the modern IT world, it is not the site that should be questioned but the specific article, the standing and qualifications of the author on the subject and the credibility of the argument. The rest is down to common sense and an ability to analyse the information you have gathered to determine a degree of probability of it being true/factually correct. It is rare to find any explanation that is 100% free of bias, it is human nature.

BTW: Wake up Paphitis ..... there is a lot going on associated with Syria! I didn't see the Aussies mentioned as being at the peace talks table? Was this an oversight?

[GreekIslandGirl]

I see the most logical posters have (understandably) decided not to vote in this ridiculous poll.

Their abstention says a lot about Erolz's warped thinking and the sort of 'evidence' he likes to gather when he cannot support the lies he spreads!

[Although, I think Pyrpolizer has alluded to something deeper that determines most outcomes.]

[miltiades]

The fact of the matter is that Greece has been seriously criticized by the EU for its failing to properly register refugees on its soil. There is no denying that Greece wants rid of the refugees as early as they arrive in Greece, there again the rest of Europe is closing its borders to would be asylum seekers.

This thread has been " frivolously" debated between two highly educated eloquent members of the forum, in an " unmiltiades ....fashion.

May I also state that Erolz has repeatedly and vehemently declared his "Cypriotness " adding that he is not Turkish but Cypriot, which of course he is.

GIG has ferociously DEFENDED Greece regardless and in a robust fashion.

[miltiades]

Erolz66:

BTW: Wake up Paphitis ..... there is a lot going on associated with Syria! I didn't see the Aussies mentioned as being at the peace talks table? Was this an oversight?

I think the USA is waking up, no longer demanding the removal of Assad as a precondition for a settlement.

The West made a dreadful error in backing 100s of different warring factions in Syria, a mistake that the Syrians are having to pay for as well as Europe.

The Russians by intervening have altered the USA position, Kerry changes stance on Syria: ‘U.S. not seeking regime change’

[Paphitis]

Paphitis:

Do these viable sources of information include outlets like RT, Smirnoff, The Clearing House and other extreme left wing anti american conspiracy promoting sites you seem to gravitate to?

They have as much validity as your sources, which you rarely quote but are obviously main stream media, clearly right wing .... even extreme right wing God bless America sites .... and anti-Putin/anti-Russian conspiracy propaganda web sites.

No matter the source you have to use common sense. For instance: To just accept verbatim what the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights says about events in Syria, is a folly. Check him out! (He is a one-man-band known to be extreme anti Assad and has been caught out many times 'massaging' his reports)

I quote many sources. Some are Right Wing, Some are Left Wing like the ABC, Guardian, and Fairfax Media and rarely I might quote extreme right wing outlets like FOX, which I might add have far more credibility than the Clearing House and that lung Geopolitics. I never quote extreme left because so often they are just weird and stupid but that does not stop you.

My views are centrist, pretty mainstream, with a lean to the Centre right obviously but I am more than happy to coexist with the soft left and quote from these sources often because they do publish pretty accurate stuff. Their purpose is not to publish total garbage that fits with their agenda.

You have an agenda RH and you could do better by looking at your sources.

[Paphitis]

Erolz66:

So if I may be so bold as to ask, in your opinion

If someone were to describe a source as being from a 'discussion site' and that source was in fact an official EU Commission press release from the official EU Commission website, would the person describing it at such be expressing their own possibly biased opinion or would they be distorting actual truth to suit their agenda ?

IMO: They would be attempting to downgrade the validity of the source and thus represent the facts as being questionable or simply an opinion. Paphitis is always doing this with me and it is a defence mechanism when there is no valid or substantive counter argument. But again IMO, in the modern IT world, it is not the site that should be questioned but the specific article, the standing and qualifications of the author on the subject and the credibility of the argument. The rest is down to common sense and an ability to analyse the information you have gathered to determine a degree of probability of it being true/factually correct. It is rare to find any explanation that is 100% free of bias, it is human nature.

BTW: Wake up Paphitis ..... there is a lot going on associated with Syria! I didn't see the Aussies mentioned as being at the peace talks table? Was this an oversight?

Yes there is a lot going on alright and many people dieing from starvation. Also Russia is bombing civilian areas.

The opposition has refused to negotiate at the peace summit so obviously Russia's intervention is not working. These guys don't appear to be desperate.

They did however show, but they are not negotiating until aid is allowed through and Pootin's Air Strikes in civilian areas cease.

Pootin and Assad Regime have black listed Australia and Japan but will negotiate with USA and Saudi Arabia (go figure the stupidity). Of course Australia is the second biggest contributor in the area behind the USA only because of the Naval buildup near Cyprus and Gulf and because there are nearly 2000 Australian Troops in Iraq and also SAS and Commando RAR ready to deploy at a moments notice.

Australia has a right to be there because it has an extensive military contribution, even more than Russua and France. They have chosen not to and don't need to because USA and Saudi Arabia are there and it is the Saudis Pootin needs to worry about not the Australians or Japanese. That is just pussy talk designed to make Pootin look tough even though he has bitten more than he can chew.

[Jerry]

I won't vote simply because I don't know, I lose interest after the first few blows because I know that regardless of the facts both participants are determined to have the last word. They really ought to meet up, perhaps they would be a little more tolerant and show each other some respect.

[Paphitis]

Erolz66:

BTW: Wake up Paphitis ..... there is a lot going on associated with Syria! I didn't see the Aussies mentioned as being at the peace talks table? Was this an oversight?

I think the USA is waking up, no longer demanding the removal of Assad as a precondition for a settlement.

The West made a dreadful error in backing 100s of different warring factions in Syria, a mistake that the Syrians are having to pay for as well as Europe.

The Russians by intervening have altered the USA position, Kerry changes stance on Syria: ‘U.S. not seeking regime change’

You need to wake up and open your eyes.

The USA and the coalition are in bed with the Syrian Opposition and the Opposition refuses to negotiate or even acknowledge Pootin or the Assad Regime.

The Coalition itself has exerted a lot of pressure on the Syrian Opposition nevertheless.

[miltiades]

Been around the block a few times, on the other hand you being so fucking naïve hasn't even started !!
WE, OURS, bullocks!