Topic: Greece vs Turkey Posted: 11-Mar-2005 at 08:19
2nd Report of the European Commission of Human Rights Turkey's invasion in Cyprus and aftermath (19 MAY 1976 -to 10 February 1083)
New population expulsions, Turkish colonization, aggravated and continuing violations
Turkey's violations of the convention
Cyprus, as a state concerned in proceedings under the Convention is not at liberty to publish any Report by the Commission on the merits (final factual findings) until such time as the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe decides on publication. Accordingly, final factual findings, if any, by the Commission cannot be set out here. Nonetheless Cyprus charges against Turkey can be disclosed as these were published in October 1978 by the Commission after it had declared Cyprus' application admissible, i.e. that it would fully investigate and that Turkey had to answer a prima facie case made out by Cyprus.
Turkey's Objections
Turkey, as in the earlier applications, raised every conceivable technical objection to the Commission's jurisdiction. In particular it claimed that no application could be considered because:
-Turkey did not recognize the government of Cyprus
Commissions ruling:
The Government of the Republic was internationally recognized, but in any event to allow Turkey to avoid enforcement of the Convention "by asserting that they do not recognize the Government..would defeat the purpose of the Convention" (Admissibility Report, The Law, para. 13).
-Turkey had no control over the occupied area which was under the exclusive jurisdiction of a "Turkish Federated State of Cyprus".
Commission's Ruling:
Turkey's jurisdiction in Cyprus could not be excluded by asserting that such an entity "allegedly exercised jurisdiction". It was the presence of Turkish Armed Forces, operating solely under direction of the Turkish Government and acting as "authorized agents of Turkey", which prevented the Government of the Republic of Cyprus from exercising jurisdiction in the occupied area, and Turkey was responsible for her Army's actions (Ibid., paras. 23-25).
Further proceedings:
In November 1983 the Commission announced that it had adopted its Report. According to Article 31.1 of the Convention this Report would have been
"on the facts and stating its opinion as to whether the facts found disclose a breach by the State concerned of its obligations under the Convention".
The substance underlying the proceedings n Cyprus vs. Turkey (Third Application).
Missing personsRelevant articles of the European Convention on Human Rights:
"Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. No one shall be deprived of his liberty..." (Article 5)
"Everyone has the right to respect for his ...family life..." (Article 8)
Charge laid against Turkey:
About 2,000 Greek Cypriots, a considerable number being civilians, are still missing. They were last seen alive in the occupied area of Cyprus after hostilities had ceased and under arrest by the Turkish army or armed Turks acting under its direction. Many had been seen in detention in prisons in Turkey or in Cyprus. Turkey nonetheless continued to prevent any investigation by international Committee of the Red Cross. For 9 years, Turkey through her puppet regime, declined to act on 5 UN General Assembly Resolutions which sought to activate a humanitarian Committee on Missing Persons to investigate the fate of all Cypriots missing as a result of the invasion. In response there was prevarication, refusal to co-operate and addition of new and obstructive conditions.
Fresh evidence about some of the missing persons last seen alive in Turkish detention revealed that some were in Adana and Amasia prisons in Turkey. others had been photographed after their surrender or in Turkish ships on their way to Turkey. Yet others had been heard on Turkish radio, broadcasting messages to their families. In the absence of proof that the missing persons had been killed or had died, Turkey was responsible for continuing deprivation of liberty of all those persons shown to have been in her custody.
Grace infringement of family rights had also occurred. Families suffered severely, being uncertain whether their loved ones were alive or dead because no account had been given of the fate of those who had disappeared although in Turkish custody.
Turkey's defense:
Turkey was not represented at the oral hearing after the Commission's dismissal of her jurisdictional objections, which included the objection that more than six months had passed since it was known that 2,000 Greek Cypriots were missing.
Commission's verdict:
The Commission, having found it established in three cases, and having found sufficient indications in an indefinite number of cases, that Greek Cypriots who are still missing were unlawfully deprived of their liberty, in Turkish custody in 1974, noting that Turkey has failed to account for the fate of these persons, concludes by 16 votes against one that Turkey has violated Article 5 of the Convention.
Displacement of persons and separation of familiesRelevant article of the European Convention of Human Rights:
"Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence". (Article 8)
Charge laid against Turkey:
The Turkish army sealed off the demarcation line running across the island and known as the green line in Nicosia. They physically prevented about 190,000 displaced Greek Cypriots (now including children born as refugees) from returning to their homes, and continued this policy without remission for a decade, thus aggravating earlier Turkish violations of refugees' rights for which the Commission had as long ago as 1976 condemned Turkey.
Turkey's continuing failure to allow families who had fled across the line to be reunited with their remaining relatives in the occupied area was an aggravating factor.
Condition for the 8,000 Greek Cypriots who remained in the occupied area in 1976 (mainly in Karpasia) were so harsh that between 1976 and 1979, about 7,000 were forced to sign applications to leave after suffering violence, threats, curfews, looting, forced labor, refusal of medical facilities and denial of secondary education. Most of the violence and harassment was effected through Anatolian settlers. Those Greek Cypriots who remained in the occupied area were often separated from their children: in order to receive an adequate education, children had to be sent in the free area and were not permitted by Turkey to return unless they formally acknowledged Turkish jurisdiction over Cyprus.
Turkey's defense:
At the admissibility stage, Turkey put forward jurisdictional objections. It should be borne in mind that Turkey's attitude, manifested in the first two applications, was to refuse to participate in Commission proceedings -in default of her procedural obligations under the Convention- once her jurisdictional objections were overruled. Turkey did not appear at the oral hearing in March 1983.
Commission's verdict:
The Commission concludes by thirteen votes against one that, by the refusal to allow the return of more than 170,000 Greek Cypriot refugees to their homes in the north Cyprus, Turkey violated and was continuing to violate Article 8 of the Convention in all these cases.
The Commission concludes by twelve votes against one that, by the eviction of Greek Cypriots from houses, including their own homes, by their transportation to other places within the north of Cyprus, or by the deportation across the demarcation line, Turkey has equally violates Article 8 of the Convention.
The Commission concludes by thirteen votes against one that, by the refusal to allow the return to their homes in the north of Cyprus to several thousand Greek Cypriots who had been transferred to the south under inter-communal agreements, Turkey violated, and was continuing to violate Article 8 of the Convention in all these cases.
The Commission concludes by fourteen votes against one with one abstention that, by the separation of Greek Cypriot families brought about by measures of displacement in a substantial number of cases, Turkey has again violated Article 8 of the Convention
Deprivation of possessionsRelevant article of the European Convention of Human Rights:
"Every natural person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of the possession. No one shall be deprived of his possessions..." (Protocol No. 1 Article 1)
Charge laid against Turkey:
The Greek Cypriot refugees who had been driven from their homes or had fled at the time of Turkey's invasion or soon thereafter continued to be deprived of their property by the Turkish Armed Forces' refusal to allow them to return. Under Turkey's direction there was now a consolidation of informal seizures. The Turkish Cypriot puppet authorities purported in 1977 to pass a so-called "Law to Provide for the Housing and Distribution of Land and Property of Equal Value" and amended this in 1982 to give semi-permanent definitive certificates of possession to Turkish settlers (including soldiers of the occupation force) and Turkish Cypriots who had been handed Greek Cypriots property.
Wholly new deprivations occurred in respect of the 7,000 Greek Cypriots (mainly from the Karpass) who, under duress, were compelled to leave their homes and possessions and to move to the free area.
More wanton destruction of cultural objects, especially of Greek Orthodox churches and religious treasures, also occurred. Remaining antiquities were discovered to be "saleable" and found their way via Turkish hands to international dealers. Turkish Cypriots wrote about destruction, pillage, theft, smuggling, and plunder.
Turkey's defense:
At the admissibility stage, Turkey put forward jurisdictional objections. It should be borne in mind that Turkey's attitude, manifested in the first two applications, was to refuse to participate in Commission proceedings -in default of her procedural obligations under the Convention- once her jurisdictional objections were overruled. Turkey did not appear at the oral hearing in March 1983.
Commission's verdict:
The Commission by twelve votes against one, finds it established that there has been deprivation of possessions of Greek Cypriots on a large scale, the exact extent of which could not be determined. This deprivation must be imputed to Turkey under the Convention and it has not been shown that any of these interferences were necessary for any of the purposes mentioned in Article 1 of Protocol 1. The Commission concludes that this provision has been violated by Turkey.
DiscriminationRelevant article of the European Convention of Human Rights:
"The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in this Convention shall be secured without discrimination on any ground such as race... religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority... or other status". (Article 14)
Charge laid against Turkey:
Most of Turkey's violations were directed against members of one community only, namely the Greek Cypriot community, because of their ethnic origin, race and religion. Turkey's aim was to eliminate all traces of Greek civilization and to set up a demographically homogeneous ethnically Turkish and Muslim state in the occupied area. In another context this would be condemned as apartheid or cultural genocide.
Turkey's defense:
At the admissibility stage, Turkey put forward jurisdictional objections. It should be borne in mind that Turkey's attitude, manifested in the first two applications, was to refuse to participate in Commission proceedings -in default of her procedural obligations under the Convention- once her jurisdictional objections were overruled. Turkey did not appear at the oral hearing in March 1983.
Commission's verdict:
Having found violations of a number of Articles of the Convention, the Commission notes that the acts violating the Convention were exclusively directed against members of one of two communities in Cyprus, namely the Greek Cypriot community. It concludes by eleven votes to three that Turkey has thus failed to secure the rights and freedoms set forth in these Articles without discrimination on the grounds of ethnic origin, race, religion as required by Article 14 of the Convention.
No remediesRelevant article of the European Convention on Human Rights:
"Everyone whose rights and freedom... are violated shall have an effective remedy..." (Article 13)
Charge laid against Turkey:
In respect of new and continuing violations from May 1976 onwards no effective remedy was provided by Turkey, whether in her own courts or those of the area she occupied. Indeed, in the occupied area Turk's puppet regime had purported to enact "Constitution", depriving Greek Cypriots of virtually all human rights and conferring "constitutional protection" in respect of many rights only on Turks.
Turkey's defense:
At the admissibility stage, Turkey put forward jurisdictional objections. It should be borne in mind that Turkey's attitude, manifested in the first two applications, was to refuse to participate in Commission proceedings -in default of her procedural obligations under the Convention- once her jurisdictional objections were overruled. Turkey did not appear at the oral hearing in March 1983.
Commission's verdict:
The Commission by thirteen votes against one and with two abstentions, has found no evidence that effective remedies, as required by Article 13 of the Convention, were in fact available.
"There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them. "
--- Joseph Alexandrovitch Brodsky, 1991, Russian-American poet, b. St. Petersburg and exiled 1972 (1940-1996)
The Commission, by eight votes against five and with two abstentions, concludes that the curfew imposed at night on enclaved Greek Cypriots in the north Cyprus, while a restriction of liberty, is not a deprivation of liberty within the meaning of Article 5(1) of the Convention.
The Commission, by twelve votes against two abstentions, further concludes that the alleged restrictions of movement outside the built-up area of villages in the north Cyprus would fall within the scope of Article 2 of Protocol No. 4, not ratifiedby either Cyprus or Turkey, rather within the scope of Article 5 of the Convention. It is therefore unable to find a violation of Article 5 insofar as the restrictions imposed on Greek Cypriots in order to prevent them from moving freely outside villages in the north of Cyprus are imputable to Turkey.
. Detention centers
The Commission, by thirteen votes against one, concludes that, by the confinement of more than two thousand Greek Cypriots to detention centers established in schools and churches at Voni, Gypsou and Morphou, Turkey has violated Article 5(1) of the Convention.
The Commission, by thirteen votes against one, further concludes that, by the confinement of Greek Cypriots to private houses in Gypsou and Morphou, where they were kept under similar circumstances as in the detention centers, Turkey has equally violated Article 5(1).
The Commission, by ten votes against two with two abstentions, finally concludes that, by the confinement of Greek Cypriots to the Kyrenia Dome Hotel after 14 August 1974, Turkey has violated Article 5(1).
. Prisoners and detainees
The Commission, by thirteen votes against one, concludes that the detention of Greek Cypriot military personnel in Turkey was not in conformity with Article 5(1) of the Convention.
The Commission, by thirteen votes against one, concludes that the detention of Greek Cypriot civilians in Turkey was equally not in conformity with Article 5(1).
Considering that it was unable to establish the imputability to Turkey under the Convention of the detention of 146 Greek Cypriots at Saray prison and Pavlides Garage in the Turkish sector of Nicosia, the Commission, by ten votes against two abstentions, does not consider itself called upon to express an opinion as to the conformity with Article 5 of the detention of Greek Cypriot prisoners in the north of Cyprus.
The Commission by fourteen votes against none, with two abstentions, has not found it necessary to examine the question of a breach of Article 5 with regard to persons accorded the status of prisoners of war.
The Commission by seven votes against six with three abstentions, decided not to consider as a separate issue the effect of detention on the exercise of the right to respect for one's private and family life and home (Article 8 of the Convention).
Deprivation of life
The Commission, by fourteen votes against one, considers that the evidence before it constitutes very strong indications of violations of Article 2 of the Convention by Turkey in a substantial number of cases. The Commission restricted the taking of evidence to a hearing of a limited number of representative witnesses and the Delegation, during the period fixed for the hearing of witnesses, heard eye-witnesses only concerning the incident of Elia. The evidence obtained for this incident establishes the killing of twelve civilians near Elia by Turkish soldiers commanded by an officer contrary to Article 2.
In view of the very detailed material before it on other killings alleged by the applicant Government, the Commission by fourteen votes against one, concludes from the whole evidence that killings happened on a larger scale that in Elia.
There is nothing to show that any of these deprivations of life were justified under paras. (1) or (2) of Article 2.
Ill-treatment
The Commission, by twelve votes against one, finds that the incidents of rape described in the cases referred to and regarded as established constitute "inhuman treatment" and thus violations of Article 3, for which Turkey is responsible under the Convention.
The Commission, by twelve votes against one, concludes that prisoners were in a number of cases physically ill-treated by Turkish soldiers. These acts of ill-treatment caused considerable injuries and at least in one case the death of the victim. By their severity they constitute "inhuman treatment" and thus violations of Article 3, for which Turkey is responsible under the Convention.
The Commission, by twelve votes against one, concludes that the withholding of an adequate supply of food and drinking water and of adequate medical treatment from Greek Cypriot prisoners held at Adana and detainees in the northern area of Cyprus, with the exception of Pavlides Garage and Saray prison, again constitutes, in the cases considered as established and in the conditions described, "inhuman treatment", and thus a violation of Article 3, for which Turkey is responsible under the Convention.
"There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them. "
--- Joseph Alexandrovitch Brodsky, 1991, Russian-American poet, b. St. Petersburg and exiled 1972 (1940-1996)
The Commission by eight votes against three and with one abstention, finds that the incompleteness of the investigation with regard to the allegations of forced labor does not allow any conclusions to be made on this issue.
"There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them. "
--- Joseph Alexandrovitch Brodsky, 1991, Russian-American poet, b. St. Petersburg and exiled 1972 (1940-1996)
3rd Report of the European Commission of Human Rights Turkey's invasion in Cyprus and aftermath
(11 February 1983 to date)
Currently continuing violations of human rights in Cyprus
As Turkey seeks to perpetuate her occupation of northern Cyprus new violations as well as continuing breaches of rights manifest themselves:
Continuing Breaches
Displacement of persons
Unremitting refusal to allow 180,000 Greek Cypriot refugees to return to the occupied area and to allow any displaced Turkish Cypriots to return to the Government-controlled area.
Deprivation of homes and properties
In May 1985 the puppet regime in the Turkish occupied area purported to introduce a "Constitution", Article 159 of which expropriated all immovable property belonging to Greek Cypriots displaced by Turkey, much of this property being taken for the use of the Turkish Army. In September 1986, the Turkish settler and Cypriot coalition "Government", announcing their program, declared that in place of definitive possession certificates they would now start giving title deeds conferring full ownership on those who had earlier been allocated Greek Cypriot-owned land.
New Breaches
Public threats to settle Varosha (Famagusta)
Turkey's puppet regime has repeatedly threatened, with an increasing intensity in 1986, to settle the as yet unoccupied Varosha area of Famagusta with Turks, instead of returning it to its 35,000 lawful inhabitants, the Greek Cypriot refugees of Varosha. (Mr Ecevit declared that Varosha could never be returned, Ankara Radio, 7.25.1986).
Threats to occupy the free area
Threats that the Turkish army will occupy the southern part of Cyprus, which is under control of the Government of the Republic, are leaked by the Turkish Government and Army to Turkey's major newspapers.
"There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them. "
--- Joseph Alexandrovitch Brodsky, 1991, Russian-American poet, b. St. Petersburg and exiled 1972 (1940-1996)
"There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them. "
--- Joseph Alexandrovitch Brodsky, 1991, Russian-American poet, b. St. Petersburg and exiled 1972 (1940-1996)
In a Grand Chamber judgment delivered at Strasbourg on 10 May 2001 in the case of Cyprus v. Turkey (application no. 25781/94), the European Court of Human Rights held, by sixteen votes to one, that the matters complained of by Cyprus in its application entailed Turkeys responsibility under the European Convention on Human Rights.
The Court held that there had been the following 14 violations of the Convention (see Decision of the Court for details):
Greek-Cypriot missing persons and their relatives
a continuing violation of Article 2 (right to life) of the Convention concerning the failure of the authorities of the respondent State to conduct an effective investigation into the whereabouts and fate of Greek-Cypriot missing persons who disappeared in life-threatening circumstances;
a continuing violation of Article 5 (right to liberty and security) concerning the failure of the Turkish authorities to conduct an effective investigation into the whereabouts and fate of the Greek-Cypriot missing persons in respect of whom there was an arguable claim that they were in Turkish custody at the time of their disappearance;
a continuing violation of Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment)
in that the silence of the Turkish authorities in the face of the real concerns of the relatives attained a level of severity which could only be categorised as inhuman treatment.
Home and property of displaced persons
a continuing violation of Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life, home and correspondence) concerning the refusal to allow the return of any Greek-Cypriot displaced persons to their homes in northern Cyprus;
a continuing violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property) concerning the fact that Greek-Cypriot owners of property in northern Cyprus were being denied access to and control, use and enjoyment of their property as well as any compensation for the interference with their property rights;
a violation of Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) concerning the failure to provide to Greek Cypriots not residing in northern Cyprus any remedies to contest interferences with their rights under Article 8 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.
Living conditions of Greek Cypriots in Karpas region of northern Cyprus
a violation of Article 9 (freedom of thought, conscience and religion) in respect of Greek Cypriots living in northern Cyprus, concerning the effects of restrictions on freedom of movement which limited access to places of worship and participation in other aspects of religious life;
a violation of Article 10 (freedom of expression) in respect of Greek Cypriots living in northern Cyprus in so far as school-books destined for use in their primary school were subject to excessive measures of censorship;
a continuing violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 in respect of Greek Cypriots living in northern Cyprus in that their right to the peaceful enjoyment of their possessions was not secured in case of their permanent departure from that territory and in that, in case of death, inheritance rights of relatives living in southern Cyprus were not recognised;
a violation of Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 (right to education) in respect of Greek Cypriots living in northern Cyprus in so far as no appropriate secondary-school facilities were available to them;
a violation of Article 3 in that the Greek Cypriots living in the Karpas area of northern Cyprus had been subjected to discrimination amounting to degrading treatment;
a violation of Article 8 concerning the right of Greek Cypriots living in northern Cyprus to respect for their private and family life and to respect for their home;
a violation of Article 13 by reason of the absence, as a matter of practice, of remedies in respect of interferences by the authorities with the rights of Greek Cypriots living in northern Cyprus under Articles 3, 8, 9 and 10 of the Convention and Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No. 1.
Rights of Turkish Cypriots living in northern Cyprus
a violation of Article 6 (right to a fair trial) on account of the legislative practice of authorising the trial of civilians by military courts.
"There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them. "
--- Joseph Alexandrovitch Brodsky, 1991, Russian-American poet, b. St. Petersburg and exiled 1972 (1940-1996)
"Since then the Turkish side has been pursuing total separation of the communities. Last year all ethnic Turks were allowed to go north in exchange for promises that the ethnic Greeks in the Turkish area would be given free movement, better schools and more medical care. In addition, the Turkish side promised to allow the United Nations to set up posts in the north and provide the Greeks with moral and material support.
The Turkish side, keeping few of its promises, persisted in putiing pressure on the remaining ethnic Greeks to leave. As a result a steady trickle of departures has become a flood. Abouy 30 Greeks go south every day".
Steven V. Roberts, "The New York Times", 1.11.1976.
"There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them. "
--- Joseph Alexandrovitch Brodsky, 1991, Russian-American poet, b. St. Petersburg and exiled 1972 (1940-1996)
Well if Greeks had been successfull in cleansing the Turks in 1974, the population percentage could have read: to Greece 100%---to Turkey 0%. What do you think? Or isn't it really high time to look at the situation that it is today. Both sections of the island should just keep what they have.
Yeah,and if the Ottoman empire had been succesfull in cleansing the Hellens during the Great Revolution of 1821 and during the persecutions of the 60's against them in Turkey things would be totally different even in Hellas.I've warned you,you cannot help it.So do not provoke.
Warning me with your biased dedication for the Greek side! Please, amuse me some more. You think there will be any solution with your kind of bargaining power. Blinded by ethnocentricity. Partitioning land in favor of some made up one-sided scheme is the best you could come up with.
Plus, aren't we talking about Cypress. Why do you have a need to bring in other historical arguements into the picture (Greece 1821)? I thought your data would be enough to support your supposed grand arguement already. Perhaps not. Oh well.
turkish kill greeks...... greeks kill turkish..... yes yes we know..
back in reality plz.it is not my intension fight with my turkish friends here. I only want somebody ( or all ) help me to find a solution acceptable from both sides
because a solution must be acceptable from both , greeks and turkish or turkish and greeks
stop fight plz... we r in 2005
i propone partision besed on populations percentuals .
Well if Greeks had been successfull in cleansing the Turks in 1974, the population percentage could have read: to Greece 100%---to Turkey 0%. What do you think? Or isn't it really high time to look at the situation that it is today. Both sections of the island should just keep what they have.
Yeah,and if the Ottoman empire had been succesfull in cleansing the Hellens during the Great Revolution of 1821 and during the persecutions of the 60's against them in Turkey things would be totally different even in Hellas.I've warned you,you cannot help it.So do not provoke.
Warning me with your biased dedication for the Greek side! Please, amuse me some more. You think there will be any solution with your kind of bargaining power. Blinded by ethnocentricity. Partitioning land in favor of some made up one-sided scheme is the best you could come up with.
Plus, aren't we talking about Cypress. Why do you have a need to bring in other historical arguements into the picture (Greece 1821)? I thought your data would be enough to support your supposed grand arguement already. Perhaps not. Oh well.
When sb is empty of arguments he starts damning....Come on man!!!Be for one time serious!Ionian asked your opinion about the reuninification on Cyprus,not to tell him that Hellens massacred Turks.It's totally irrelevant with what he asked you,or perhaps you do not know what he did asked you?Why do i have to bring other historical arguments ?Why do YOU bring irrelevant statements with the only result to provoke?Moreover, what i've showed is that Turkey from the 30's started an aggressive and nationalistic policy against the Hellenic element of Asia Minor which continued through the 50' and 60's with the highlight of the Turkish invasion in Cyprus.All are a simple chain.What the Hellens MAY did in Turkish-Cypriots,which i do not believe it,was a reason not the real cause.Supposed grand argument?If you are not capable of confronting my argument it's not my fault.Ethnocentricity? Why because i have an image of the Hellenic Presidential Guard?Come on!!!You can do better than that!This specific Guard is of a nation which followed a peacefull and defensive foreign policy for 82 YEARS.What was Turkey doing those 82 years?Some coup d'etats maybe?Some persecutions maybe?Some invasions maybe?Some continuing violations of the Hellenic airspace?Some crisis like Imia maybe?Some detsructions of the Hellenic properties in Constantinople maybe?You are not in a position of just accusing the neighbour for no reason with sth which was happening in your own house in a double extent.....Of course to have a second Turkish flag in the shape of Turkey in a sig is not an expression of nationalism,is it?Or to say that every Turk is born a soldier in another sig?I think i am not the one whose dedication is biased.....Moreover YOU were the one who claimed that the obstacles are ONLY from the Hellenic side,which is ridiculous even to think if it.A little objectivity will not harm you...For the last time,reply to what it is asked from you and DO NOT SAY SOME WORDS OF AIR IN A PROVOKING MANNER.Am i clear now?
"There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them. "
--- Joseph Alexandrovitch Brodsky, 1991, Russian-American poet, b. St. Petersburg and exiled 1972 (1940-1996)
CYPRUS reunification or partision? SEARCH AND VOTE IN THIS POLL. thks
Reunification.
"There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them. "
--- Joseph Alexandrovitch Brodsky, 1991, Russian-American poet, b. St. Petersburg and exiled 1972 (1940-1996)
"There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them. "
--- Joseph Alexandrovitch Brodsky, 1991, Russian-American poet, b. St. Petersburg and exiled 1972 (1940-1996)
Who needs reunification? The Cypriot Government is now a member in the European Union, and will grow rich off it, while the Northern side will grow poorer. The North needs to put aside its probelms and CONVINCE the governemtn that it really wants peace, NOT AMerica and Turkey. The GREEK cypriots are the ones on the island, not the americans and such..
Listen boys. Explaining to you all gets repetitive. You may have looked up my post from last month regarding this subject in the the topic - "What if Cyprus belonged to Greece". It was taken off this forum due to what is precisely going on here. So I will not participate with such beligerence. See, I tell you what I think and you don't like it.
Pay close attention to my answers. Ionian's question was already answered by me. Decipher it yourselves. Ionian's desire for partition based on population caught my eye because it totally denies rights of one side. Well you could pull the wool over anyone who did not know enough. But I'm a wolf thats been around. I could provoke if need be. There is no need to. You guys are doing a wonderful job of getting wound up all by yourselves. I also advise you Mr. Spartacus that blatant topic changing does not create reasonable discussion. Its all blabber. If I were to get sidetracked with every aversion and changed topic, this could go on for a long time.
Do you deny Mr Seko that you precisely told:If Greeks had been succesful in c leansing the Turks without being asked to say it?This statement is highly provoking.You want a reasonable discussion?Then put aside the "If Greeks been succesfull in cleansing the Turks" and words like that.Am i clear now?And all are we talking about is taken from this topic not from others.I will not tolerate any stupid nationalistic statements again from both sides.Ok,strategos?Be more polite if you want others to be polite with you.This is an objective history forum,so your behaviour is not only insulting the Hellenic side but also the forum itself.If you continue in this way you will get banned and i do not think you want that.If you want to reply to this statement do it on PM.
"There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them. "
--- Joseph Alexandrovitch Brodsky, 1991, Russian-American poet, b. St. Petersburg and exiled 1972 (1940-1996)
Mr. Spartacus there is a difference between you and us (Seko and me).
We are showing facts but you show only words. You are talking about European organizations which you are a member of it. They are based and mean nothing for me.
It is nice to see Greeks like Ionian so that we may be hopeful for future.
Lets all reflect on our own bias and try to respect difference of opinions. Our ability to cope with differences should create a better understanding of our own strengths and weaknesses. We can stick to our beliefs yet add tolerance to the mix.
Mr. Spartacus there is a different between you and us (Seko and me).
We are showing facts but you show only words. You are talking about European organizations which you are a member of it. They are based and mean nothing for me.
It is nice to see Greeks like Ionian so that we may be hopeful for future.
You recognize some banch of sites as facts but you do not recognize EU's opinion as facts or what some of the biggest newspapers and magazines say about it?Man,you've lowered your level way too much....
"There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them. "
--- Joseph Alexandrovitch Brodsky, 1991, Russian-American poet, b. St. Petersburg and exiled 1972 (1940-1996)
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Greece vs Turkey
Share Topic
Printable Version
Google
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Windows Live
Yahoo Bookmarks
reddit
Facebook
MySpace
Newsvine
Furl
Topic Search 
Topic Options
Topic: Greece vs Turkey
Why because i have an image of the Hellenic Presidential Guard?Come on!!!You can do better than that!This specific Guard is of a nation which followed a peacefull and defensive foreign policy for 82 YEARS.What was Turkey doing those 82 years?Some coup d'etats maybe?Some persecutions maybe?Some invasions maybe?Some continuing violations of the Hellenic airspace?Some crisis like Imia maybe?Some detsructions of the Hellenic properties in Constantinople maybe?You are not in a position of just accusing the neighbour for no reason with sth which was happening in your own house in a double extent.....Of course to have a second Turkish flag in the shape of Turkey in a sig is not an expression of nationalism,is it?Or to say that every Turk is born a soldier in another sig?I think i am not the one whose dedication is biased.....Moreover YOU were the one who claimed that the obstacles are ONLY from the Hellenic side,which is ridiculous even to think if it.A little objectivity will not harm you...For the last time,reply to what it is asked from you and DO NOT SAY SOME WORDS OF AIR IN A PROVOKING MANNER.Am i clear now?
