 |
| Author |
Message |
samarkeolog
Villager
Joined: 03 Sep 2007
Posts: 32
Location: London, UK
|
|
I'm currently trying to write a conference paper on "treatment of cultural heritage in Cyprus, 1963-1974". One thing distracting me is treatment of cultural heritage between 1958 and 1963. It seems that all organised nationalist attacks were false flag operations - extremists' attacks upon their own symbolic sites, which they blamed on their enemies to frighten their own community and force it to accept their own extremism. There were also somewhat spontaneous nationalist attacks caused by the extremists' false flag operations and open anti-left-wing attacks by nationalists (but against their own community).
If you're interested, here's the post on false flag operations between 1958 and 1963.
Does anyone know what exactly happened to AKEL's Limassol District Committee Office and when? I read something by Ezekias Papaioannou that mentioned it was "blown up" by "fascists" (presumably EOKA), but it didn't say anything more about what happened, or even when it did.
Cheers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
stavrizatz
Mukhtar/is
Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 952
Location: Australia / Lefkosia
|
|
| samarkeolog wrote: |
| One thing distracting me is treatment of cultural heritage between 1958 and 1963. It seems that all organised nationalist attacks were false flag operations |
why do you find it distructing, you only want to write between 63-74. Before 63 and after 59 there were no incidences of violence as far as i know, in 57, 58 there was some but limited violence againt each other which marked the begining of the intercommunal strife. |
|
| Back to top |
|
samarkeolog
Villager
Joined: 03 Sep 2007
Posts: 32
Location: London, UK
|
|
| stavrizatz wrote: |
| samarkeolog wrote: |
| One thing distracting me is treatment of cultural heritage between 1958 and 1963. It seems that all organised nationalist attacks were false flag operations |
why do you find it distructing, you only want to write between 63-74. Before 63 and after 59 there were no incidences of violence as far as i know, in 57, 58 there was some but limited violence againt each other which marked the begining of the intercommunal strife. |
Well, it was distracting because it was interesting, and it was interesting because there was violence, but, as I detail in the post, it was false flag operations. TMT attacked Turkish Cypriot places but pretended EOKA did it. EOKA attacked Greek Cypriot places, but pretended TMT did it. They both wanted to make their own communities frightened and violent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
stavrizatz
Mukhtar/is
Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 952
Location: Australia / Lefkosia
|
|
| Can you please give me an example of an EOKA attack on Greek Cypriots blaming TMT, because as far as I am concerned this never happenned |
|
| Back to top |
|
samarkeolog
Villager
Joined: 03 Sep 2007
Posts: 32
Location: London, UK
|
|
| stavrizatz wrote: |
| Can you please give me an example of an EOKA attack on Greek Cypriots blaming TMT, because as far as I am concerned this never happenned |
Sorry, I phrased my answer poorly. It wasn't EOKA; it was the Akritas Organisation (although that was a successor to EOKA, set up by Georkadjis with Makarios's blessing). I didn't say they attacked Greek Cypriots; I said they attacked Greek Cypriot places, at least once. On the 3rd of December 1963, the Akritas Organisation bombed the statue of EOKA fighter Markos Drakos. |
|
| Back to top |
|
samarkeolog
Villager
Joined: 03 Sep 2007
Posts: 32
Location: London, UK
|
|
| The Akritas Organisation's Deputy Chief of Staff Christodoulos Christodoulou called Makarios its 'invisible leader'. With EOKA fighters and state ministers as its leaders, it was an EOKA successor and a state paramilitary. |
|
| Back to top |
|
stavrizatz
Mukhtar/is
Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 952
Location: Australia / Lefkosia
|
|
| samarkeolog wrote: |
| stavrizatz wrote: |
| Can you please give me an example of an EOKA attack on Greek Cypriots blaming TMT, because as far as I am concerned this never happenned |
Sorry, I phrased my answer poorly. It wasn't EOKA; it was the Akritas Organisation (although that was a successor to EOKA, set up by Georkadjis with Makarios's blessing). I didn't say they attacked Greek Cypriots; I said they attacked Greek Cypriot places, at least once. On the 3rd of December 1963, the Akritas Organisation bombed the statue of EOKA fighter Markos Drakos. |
ok
but I am 99.9% sure that Makarios had nothing to do with any of the post 1960 paramilitary organisations. Georkadjis ang Makarios were not in good terms, Georkadjis was an underground fascist and Makarios was a priest. They worked together in the government but the only reason i believe they did so is because Makarios did not want to be in conflict with them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
city
Site Admin
Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 3423
Location: Larnaca area
|
|
samarkeolog, it might be helpful for you if you'd actually get the book the linked article is mentioning....
It sounds as this is exactly what you are after.
stavri, it's the same book I asked you about in my post a few weeks back  The First Partition, by Makarios Droushiotis |
|
| Back to top |
|
samarkeolog
Villager
Joined: 03 Sep 2007
Posts: 32
Location: London, UK
|
|
| city wrote: |
samarkeolog, it might be helpful for you if you'd actually get the book the linked article is mentioning....
It sounds as this is exactly what you are after.
stavri, it's the same book I asked you about in my post a few weeks back The First Partition, by Makarios Droushiotis |
I'm going to, but it doesn't seem to be on Amazon yet; I'm going to ask the next time I'm in Waterstone's, too, but I don't when it's going to be available here. I'll probably have gone back to Cyprus and bought it there first! |
|
| Back to top |
|
samarkeolog
Villager
Joined: 03 Sep 2007
Posts: 32
Location: London, UK
|
|
| stavrizatz wrote: |
| I am 99.9% sure that Makarios had nothing to do with any of the post 1960 paramilitary organisations. Georkadjis ang Makarios were not in good terms, Georkadjis was an underground fascist and Makarios was a priest. They worked together in the government but the only reason i believe they did so is because Makarios did not want to be in conflict with them. |
Again, this is an article citing Makarios Drousiotis's work (and again, the book's not available on Amazon but I do hope I can get it through Waterstone's, or somewhere), but:
| Quote: |
| the former EOKA leaders founded paramilitary groups – the three main ones were headed by Polycarpos Georgadjis and Tassos Papadopoulos, the Interior and Labour ministers respectively; Vassos Lyssarides, Makarios’ physician; and Nikos Sampson, an unsavoury and fanatical nationalist thug'. |
I find it difficult to believe that two members of his cabinet and his own doctor were running paramilitaries but he had absolutely nothing to do with it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
stavrizatz
Mukhtar/is
Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 952
Location: Australia / Lefkosia
|
|
This guy, Andrekos Varnavas, is the worst historian I 've read so far, what he writes contradicts the most reliable sources of Cyprus history.
The speech of the bishop of Kition is a widely known fact and he questions it, the involvement of Cyprus in the Greek war of independence is another fact that this guy questions!
...if I were you I wouldn't use his work as a reference, half of what he sais are lies! But again why trust me... so I suggest you look at other sources too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
stavrizatz
Mukhtar/is
Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 952
Location: Australia / Lefkosia
|
|
| city wrote: |
samarkeolog, it might be helpful for you if you'd actually get the book the linked article is mentioning....
It sounds as this is exactly what you are after.
stavri, it's the same book I asked you about in my post a few weeks back The First Partition, by Makarios Droushiotis |
ok, i haven't seen the link
What I don't understand is that he sais Georkadjis acted with Makarios blessing, but then sais that Makarios and Kucuk were trying to calm the paramilitaries down. If Makarios blessed the paramilitaries but then publicly tells them to cease fire then Makarios was the biggest thung, and because I don't believe he was just like I don't believe Kucuk was involved in TMT, I think Drousiotis is a bit ambiguous in that.
As for Makarios Plan for Enosis, yes he wanted Enosis and he was planning to achieve that in a democratic way, not by force in the steps whown by Drousiotis, nevertheless the ammendments on the negative points of the constitution I think had little to do with enosis. From the thirteen points only the power of veto had make the democratic slide into Enosis easier. |
|
| Back to top |
|
samarkeolog
Villager
Joined: 03 Sep 2007
Posts: 32
Location: London, UK
|
|
| stavrizatz wrote: |
This guy, Andrekos Varnavas, is the worst historian I 've read so far, what he writes contradicts the most reliable sources of Cyprus history.
The speech of the bishop of Kition is a widely known fact and he questions it, the involvement of Cyprus in the Greek war of independence is another fact that this guy questions!
...if I were you I wouldn't use his work as a reference, half of what he sais are lies! But again why trust me... so I suggest you look at other sources too. |
The stuff I've read of his quotes or cites the contemporary sources, rather than their interpretations by people with vested interests, so it seems reliable. He doesn't go any further than Rolandos Katsiaounis does in questioning the way the Bishop of Kition's speech is presented. |
|
| Back to top |
|
samarkeolog
Villager
Joined: 03 Sep 2007
Posts: 32
Location: London, UK
|
|
| stavrizatz wrote: |
| What I don't understand is that he sais Georkadjis acted with Makarios blessing, but then sais that Makarios and Kucuk were trying to calm the paramilitaries down. If Makarios blessed the paramilitaries but then publicly tells them to cease fire then Makarios was the biggest thung, and because I don't believe he was just like I don't believe Kucuk was involved in TMT, I think Drousiotis is a bit ambiguous in that. |
I think this is part of the point of the false flag operations. Both sides wanted to make it look like the other one was responsible for the troubles, and both sides expected to achieve their aims comparatively easily. The Greek Cypriot extremists wanted to make it look like the Turkish Cypriots had revolted against the state, then use that as an excuse to break them. The Turkish Cypriot extremists wanted to make it look like the Greek Cypriots had usurped the state, then use that as an excuse for Turkey to break them. Maybe Makarios and Kucuk wanted to achieve their aims in a controlled way, and felt they needed the Akritas Organisation and TMT, but they couldn't control those paramilitaries. |
|
| Back to top |
|
stavrizatz
Mukhtar/is
Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 952
Location: Australia / Lefkosia
|
|
| samarkeolog wrote: |
| I think this is part of the point of the false flag operations. Both sides wanted to make it look like the other one was responsible for the troubles, and both sides expected to achieve their aims comparatively easily. The Greek Cypriot extremists wanted to make it look like the Turkish Cypriots had revolted against the state, then use that as an excuse to break them. The Turkish Cypriot extremists wanted to make it look like the Greek Cypriots had usurped the state, then use that as an excuse for Turkey to break them. |
Yes, we agree.
| samarkeolog wrote: |
| Maybe Makarios and Kucuk wanted to achieve their aims in a controlled way, and felt they needed the Akritas Organisation and TMT, but they couldn't control those paramilitaries. |
I would say they were both moderates and they didn't need the paramilitaries but at they same time they were scared to oppose them because they didn't want them to turn against themselves. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
All times are GMT + 3 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next
|
| Page 1 of 3 |
| |
 
 
Link Partners
605057 Attacks blocked
|
Register 
Log in 
Album 
Home