PDA

View Full Version : Is U.K. friend of Cyprus ?



sealion
24 Oct 07,, 06:59
Thoughts for discussion
While looking back in history of Cyprus as it is unfolded till few hours ago (when UK government signed a treaty with the invading country in Cyprus –Turkey- recognising the invaded part as “Turkish republic of northern Cyprus”), I reached into a conclusion that the government of U.K. (Not the citizens which I really like) never showed good will in Cyprus and looks forward talking about de-isolating the invading Forces , because it is shame to be isolated by the powerful mighty Cypriots , who are terrorising the poor non-powerful Turkish Army in the North. Even if UK was one of the three countries to ensure the well and smoothly work of the republic, (just like Turkey who invaded Cyprus after organizing the invasion since 1954-published in to many newspapers to be denied, a map–plan of UK was showing the places to be taken by Turkish since 1954 .This however leads to the illegalisation of the state of British sovereign bases). Just to remind that history of Turks in Cyprus starts at 1570 (you may check every date I give ) by invading in Cyprus , killing the half population in Nicosia and almost all the population in Famagusta right after promising a peace treaty by Lala Mustafa Admiral of Ottomans . Lala Mustafa took out the skin of Marcanonios Vragadinos the chief of defending forces of Famagusta because he made to kill half of Lala Mustafa army (80000) with his defending forces of 3000 soldiers (siege lasted 11 months) . One tip I don’t really have any problem with the Turkish Cypriots which I consider as Cypriots (but their real number in north is much smaller than the one given by the Turkish government which is trying to re-settle the north with Turkish brought from Turkey.
Should i consider that UK does not know History ? or that doesnt know the reality ? no ll better have to suppose that UK knows only money for religion (petroleum)

Ucar
24 Oct 07,, 07:37
Pray tell me, if the United Kingdom is such an enemy of Cyprus -by which you mean only the South Cyprus since the island harbors two de facto governing authorities mutually exclusive of each other- how is it that South Cyprus is a member of the EU whereas, Northern Cyprus is not ? Why has not the United Kingdom government vetoed Cyprus' bid to join the EU despite legal problems arising from the current divided situation of the island ?

sealion
24 Oct 07,, 07:57
Pray tell me, if the United Kingdom is such an enemy of Cyprus -by which you mean only the South Cyprus since the island harbors two de facto governing authorities mutually exclusive of each other- how is it that South Cyprus is a member of the EU whereas, Northern Cyprus is not ? Why has not the United Kingdom government vetoed Cyprus' bid to join the EU despite legal problems arising from the current divided situation of the island ?

well , very difficult to be un answered :) you see when you are invading another country you cannot set your terms for recognition of you armies as a new country goverment so EU suspended membership for northen part of Cyprus .(you should know that ) .How ever the port of Famagusta even under the control of Turkish army is working illegaly . because the "powerful" cypriots can not impose international law to Turkish Army .

Ucar
25 Oct 07,, 07:50
Under International Law there is no internationally recognized "Northern Cyprus" government. Thus, it is not possible within the boundaries of International Law, to suspend Northern Cyrups' membership in EU. This would mean recognition of the Northern Cyprus governing authority under International Law.

Cyprus has been accepted a full member of EU as a whole island. There is no "accepted Souther Cyprus" and no "suspended Northern Cyprus". If that was the case than there would be Internation Recognition of Northern Cyprus, and legalized division on the island. This is not the case.

The de facto situation on the island necessisates the awkward and irregular application of membership regulations to South Cyprus only. You should know as well as I do that there is a problematic situation as a result of this decision of EU. United Kingdom did not veto or block this decision.

I repeat my question; please do not go into the invasion part since it is irrelevant to discuss under this topic. I will be happy to correspond further under another topic if that pleases you.


If United Kingdom was such an enemy of Cyprus -by which you mean only the South Cyprus since the island harbors two de facto governing authorities mutually exclusive of each other- how is it that South Cyprus is a member of the EU whereas, Northern Cyprus is not ? Why has not the United Kingdom government vetoed Cyprus' bid to join the EU despite legal problems arising from the current divided situation of the island ?

sealion
26 Oct 07,, 06:07
you are partially right , you see what is accepted in EU is the Republic of Cyprus , made up with constitution for all cypriots greek Cypriots and Turkish cypriots , (president and vice president greek and turkish cypriot -what does not include is Turkish settlers) .What is the problem is the 1974 inansion . the part of cyprus under turkish invasion is been suspended till solution this is Turkey problem only , whether wants solution or not (fair solution , not Turkish solution , where everything belongs to Turkey till the day she dicide to eliminate all on the island.) there is not south or north like USA is only free part and invaded part.
However , irepeat something you did not understand , i consider Turkish Cypriots as true Cypriots .
(devils question: does Turkey accept the 4-8 nations in it as Turkish?
what are "whites" and "blacks" people -term- in Turkey?)

Ucar
26 Oct 07,, 07:49
you are partially right , you see what is accepted in EU is the Republic of Cyprus , made up with constitution for all cypriots greek Cypriots and Turkish cypriots , (president and vice president greek and turkish cypriot -what does not include is Turkish settlers) .What is the problem is the 1974 inansion . the part of cyprus under turkish invasion is been suspended till solution this is Turkey problem only , whether wants solution or not (fair solution , not Turkish solution , where everything belongs to Turkey till the day she dicide to eliminate all on the island.) there is not south or north like USA is only free part and invaded part.
However , irepeat something you did not understand , i consider Turkish Cypriots as true Cypriots .
(devils question: does Turkey accept the 4-8 nations in it as Turkish?
what are "whites" and "blacks" people -term- in Turkey?)

Here are some more remarks

Although Turkish settlers have moved into the island following 1974, there are also mainland Greek settlers moving in. The number of Turks is higher for sure, however, let us not omit the fact that there are also Greek settlers on the island.

The "Turkish Solution" is definetely NOT to own the whole island, and decimate the Greek Cypriots. This is hate speech you are writing down and you know it. Turkey's position and thesis about the partitioning of the island is easy to find on the internet. I will argue no further about this meaningless rhetoric.

Turkish Cypriots who hold identity papers granted before 1974 are not allowed free movement in the EU. So I believe this easily substantiated my earlier claim that International Law is being selectively applied in the Cyprus case.

Answer to Devil's question :
Turkey does not recognise, under neither domestic or nor international law, any minorities according to their ethnical background. Turkey recognises minorities according to their religion. As an example; there is no "Greek minority" is Turkey, there is "Orthodox minority". As a Cypriot, you should know that this is the same for "Muslim Greeks" of Turkish origin residing in Western Thrace. They are not recognised as "Turkish minority" by Greece in domestic or international law.

sealion
26 Oct 07,, 12:20
Here are some more remarks

Although Turkish settlers have moved into the island following 1974, there are also mainland Greek settlers moving in. The number of Turks is higher for sure, however, let us not omit the fact that there are also Greek settlers on the island.

The "Turkish Solution" is definetely NOT to own the whole island, and decimate the Greek Cypriots. This is hate speech you are writing down and you know it. Turkey's position and thesis about the partitioning of the island is easy to find on the internet. I will argue no further about this meaningless rhetoric.

Turkish Cypriots who hold identity papers granted before 1974 are not allowed free movement in the EU. So I believe this easily substantiated my earlier claim that International Law is being selectively applied in the Cyprus case.

Answer to Devil's question :
Turkey does not recognise, under neither domestic or nor international law, any minorities according to their ethnical background. Turkey recognises minorities according to their religion. As an example; there is no "Greek minority" is Turkey, there is "Orthodox minority". As a Cypriot, you should know that this is the same for "Muslim Greeks" of Turkish origin residing in Western Thrace. They are not recognised as "Turkish minority" by Greece in domestic or international law.

Dear friend , Turkish Cypriot holding Those ID s are welcomed to change them into new ones wich allow them to travel around E.U. (change into new is without fee under presence of the old one).
there are no Greek settlers in Cyprus but in addition there are European settlers , mostly from UK and Germany (you may make your search about that , also there are a lot of Israel buyers in the part controlled by the Turkish Army
As about Religions There are no such kind of division , You can have a look in Greek Parliament for elected Turkish (you can not find elected Greeks in Turkish Parliament because your Army generals would not allow that). Any way thank you for giving me your point of view.

sealion
26 Oct 07,, 12:28
Anan from Ruanda (genocide in Ruanda 1994 by his blessings) made a plan leaving Cyprus as not existed 4 days before to become a full member of E.U.(Anan plan claimed form the both sides to give off their states 4 days before E.U. enlargment -Turkish Army was gathered at Attalia) no republic would be there to have a voice in UN , no International treatys , no state , no nothing , just a piece of rocks ready to accept the Turkish army collected in Attalia to invade the rest of the island (4rth army of Turkey) -The Aegean Army as it used to be called by Generals . Learning by history is a good think , and history taught us well for Turkish Generals behaviour.

Ucar
26 Oct 07,, 15:23
Dear Sir

Speaking with and about facts is one thing. Speaking without facts and general information collected from speaking with friends, and reading newspapers is another. This will be my last postign on this thread because you are deliberately not staying on topic. Instead you are choosing to revert to rhetoric and hate speech which is not a direction I am willing to go to.


Turkish Cypriot holding Those ID s are welcomed to change them into new ones wich allow them to travel around E.U. (change into new is without fee under presence of the old one).

You will notice that a change in ID is required. However, these Turkish Cypriots are holding valid IDs granted before 1974. Why is the need for a change ? Why is the Greek Authority in the south allowed to issue IDs that allow free movement in the EU ? You also conceeded earlier that Cyprus was granted EU membership as a whole island. Why is it only the Greek Authority that is allowed to issue new IDs. You see that there is a problem in the logic. Hence my earlier point that international law is being selectively applied to a very problematic issue.


As about Religions There are no such kind of division , You can have a look in Greek Parliament for elected Turkish (you can not find elected Greeks in Turkish Parliament because your Army generals would not allow that).

You argument that there is no such kind of division is groundless. Turkey does not recognise minorities according to ethnical basis, and neither does Greece vis-a-vis Turks residing in Greece. They are recognised as "Muslim minority" not "Turkish Minority". You may want to check some documents before arguing on this any further. There are no "Turkish Greeks" in the Greek parliament, there are "Muslim Greeks". The two definitions are very clearly different and distinctive in International Law. Here's something from Lausanna Treaty which you can read while you enjoy this post. Where is the "ethnical" referrence in the treaty Sir ?

TREATY OF LAUSANNA,
ARTICLE 45.

The rights conferred by the provisions of the present Section on the non-Moslem minorities of Turkey will be similarly conferred by Greece on the Moslem minority in her territory.


Any way thank you for giving me your point of view.

You are more than welcome but I do not think you understand what I am saying.

I will not argue any further since you are spewing hate speech based on groundless rhetoric. If you ahd remembered the actions of EOKA as well as Turkish Generals than Cyrpus issue could have been resolved. At this time, with such mindsettings I see no hope.

A last word, I sincerely hope you can clear your mind one day, and learn how to write and argue on factual information with some generally acceptable attitude.

Ucar, out.

sealion
26 Oct 07,, 19:37
Dear Sir

Speaking with and about facts is one thing. Speaking without facts and general information collected from speaking with friends, and reading newspapers is another. This will be my last postign on this thread because you are deliberately not staying on topic. Instead you are choosing to revert to rhetoric and hate speech which is not a direction I am willing to go to.

thank you . - I m sorry , I can not leave points without answer any way.
but be more specific about what are not facts (maybe i can give even photos and official Turkish documents , Even a Turkish General admission of what it could be done if anan plan was accepted with date -Year-and name , about Anan 500.000 dead Tutsi out of 1.000.000 total in Ruanda after the orders of Anan to the UN commander in Ruanda not to collect the guns before genocide starts because that way he would participate instead of being observer and the delay of 6 months till France decided to send troops to stop genocide avoiding UN lines are facts ) But thats another story far away from what we should talk . Anan plan actually is not , as it was build with the help of UK and as long it was into the presidency of EU shows that .

You will notice that a change in ID is required. However, these Turkish Cypriots are holding valid IDs granted before 1974. Why is the need for a change ? Why is the Greek Authority in the south allowed to issue IDs that allow free movement in the EU ? You also conceeded earlier that Cyprus was granted EU membership as a whole island. Why is it only the Greek Authority that is allowed to issue new IDs. You see that there is a problem in the logic. Hence my earlier point that international law is being selectively applied to a very problematic issue.

EU requires those documents for any one travelling allong EU (we had to change those papers too)any country joining EU has to change those documents . I guess Turkey would have to do so soon too.


You argument that there is no such kind of division is groundless. Turkey does not recognise minorities according to ethnical basis, and neither does Greece vis-a-vis Turks residing in Greece. They are recognised as "Muslim minority" not "Turkish Minority". You may want to check some documents before arguing on this any further. There are no "Turkish Greeks" in the Greek parliament, there are "Muslim Greeks". The two definitions are very clearly different and distinctive in International Law. Here's something from Lausanna Treaty which you can read while you enjoy this post. Where is the "ethnical" referrence in the treaty Sir ?

TREATY OF LAUSANNA,
ARTICLE 45.

The rights conferred by the provisions of the present Section on the non-Moslem minorities of Turkey will be similarly conferred by Greece on the Moslem minority in her territory.

this treaty was not kept by Turkey , several times , however this point is right , but you didnt answer my point.How many greeks -not only orthodox-but greeks too are in Parliament . (dont bother , i know the answer , i know the reason )

You are more than welcome but I do not think you understand what I am saying.

thank you . I m trying ;)

I will not argue any further since you are spewing hate speech based on groundless rhetoric. If you ahd remembered the actions of EOKA as well as Turkish Generals than Cyrpus issue could have been resolved. At this time, with such mindsettings I see no hope.

well there are official infos and photos in my job . i remember to much about EOKA but that is leading me to the right direction and we might get into the right subject :)

A last word, I sincerely hope you can clear your mind one day, and learn how to write and argue on factual information with some generally acceptable attitude.

dear friend i really enjoyed talking with you , i wish we could talk more in a general talking subject (dont care to answer me back it is ok)

About my mind you have to understand that i can not forget my history as i understand that you can not forget yours , you see i never told you anything into this direction .

Ucar, out.

roger out

sealion
26 Oct 07,, 19:53
ucar , well i can not resist one last question , would you consider UK friend of Cyprus ?(If you were Cypriot i mean)

sealion
02 Nov 07,, 16:38
ucar , well i can not resist one last question , would you consider UK friend of Cyprus ?(If you were Cypriot i mean)

thank you UCAR your silence spoke for you , this is what i m saying no Cypriot count U.K. Goverment treatment to Cyprus friendly ,

sealion
02 Nov 07,, 16:43
Is it possible for someone to give me a positive view of UK actions for Cyprus (not the occupied byTurkish invaders-settlers since 1974, Turkish army controlled site)?

sealion
02 Nov 07,, 17:33
Just a little point , Turkish Cypriot left in the occupied area are the 20 percent and Turkish settlers are the 80 percent , those 80 percent are actually ''isolated '' because Cyprus republic doesn’t recognize them as Cypriot (isolating means not accepted in the free part of Cyprus , just to explain what UK wants to stop , they do have the opportunity for exports through the free ports of Cyprus by representation , but they are making their exports from the under Turkish Army occupation since 1974 port of Famagusta and Gazi and 1or 2 other terminals ) . It is those that UK is trying to help.
Turkish Cypriots are Cypriots and they are recognized by Cyprus republic they are accepted in the republic hospital in the free area of Cyprus as Cypriots, they are free to go where they want around the free part of Cyprus, they are even coming to work in the free area massively, they have Cyprus republic papers and EU passports etc.
The above can be viewed and confirmed by anyone passing by in Cyprus , -and really shows that plans of UK are not for de-isolating Turkish Cypriots but Turkish Army ,( by the way the Turkish military personell are getting fakes Turkish Cypriots id 's , totally 40000 Turkish people got the Fake id s that way by Denktas and Tallat "government" plus the settlers from turkey in similar numbers) getting status of ownership and right for the petroleum in Cyprus -witch are against international Law , against EU partnership , against the treatment of establishment 1960 , against the status of sovereign bases of UK in Cyprus , (from where UK is in position to confirm all of the above mentioned realities) :cool: (waiting for anyone who would dare to face facts in case he wants to deny any of the above)