www.talkcyprus.org

[IrishCypriot]

Reply to all.

As quoted in the most reliable source of the english language.... the oxford dictionary...

"terrorist

• noun a person who uses violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.

— DERIVATIVES terrorism noun."

Now tell me that EOKA was not a terrorist organisation. There is a big difference between the Goals of an organisation and methods of and organisation. If what happenend in Cyprus never happened and today, EOKA did what they did 40 years ago, who would stand up and say they were different to Milosovic, Sadam Hussien, Palestinian Liberation Organisation or any other terrorist group or regime???

I hate, always have and always will, anyone who stands up with a gun and threatens to use it for an objective.... where did democracy go?

[Mete]

Sorry for picking quotes from random posts of yours but I don't have time to answer every post in detail.
stavrizatz wrote:
hey Mete I'll say it again EOKA men killed 4 Turkish Cypriot civilians. I don't what that guy Sevgul Uludag wants to prove but if you want I can provide you a million source with positive stories about EOKA.

Where do you get this 4 Turkish Cypriots? I'm just curious. Ok, I'm also curious to hear the million sources with positive stories about EOKA. Tell me some stories where EOKA did something good for the people of Cyprus (Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot).
stavrizatz wrote:
... Mete please read again what you wrote and stop contradicting yourself. You are the one who suggest dialogue, you call my opinion fantasy world without proving the opposite. Did I ever attack your opinion? To me it seems that the idea that EOKA men were murderers and terrorists have settled deep in your mind and you are not able to look out of the box.

I told you that I don't consider all EOKA members as terrorists and murderers. But I don't consider them heroes either! Why? Because they didn't bring any good to the island, neither to their community nor to my community. You tell me what good EOKA brought to this island. I'm waiting.

SEcondly, hundreds of Turkish Cypriots were killed between 1963-1974. Who killed these people? Were they all armed soldiers? If EOKA didn't kill them, who did then? I hope you don't ask me to prove that hundreds of Turkish Cypriots were killed between 1963-1974 either. If you do, that would be as absurd as me asking you to prove that hundreds of Greek Cypriots were killed in 1974!
stavrizatz wrote:
Also Mete why would the British lie or underestimate the deaths on their own side? It is in their interest to show that more than 4 Turkish Cypriot civilians died and more than 16 British to prove that EOKA was indeed a terrorist group, but they didn't.

What are you talking about? I'm talking about the time period between 1963-1974.
stavrizatz wrote:
mo the word terrorism was used by the British and Turkish Cypriots because automacally it has a negative connotation. Conveniently you accept it in order to underestimate the contribution of EOKA to Cyprus.

What contribution? I'm still waiting to hear what EOKA contributed to this island.

[stavrizatz]

Mete wrote:
Quote: What are you talking about? I'm talking about the time period between 1963-1974.
EOKA did not exist in that period. You are refering to paramilitary groups with ex-EOKA element and EOKA B'. I don't think my views are very different to yours when it comes to those groups and that period. Those groups were a main catalyst to our island's division. I never called them heroes. Surely in that period many Turkish Cypriot civilians got killed, I have no reason to doubt that ... but I think I stated clearly that i am not talking about 63-74 but the period 55-59. In that period according to the source I've provided in the previous post only 4 Turkish Cypriot and 16 British civilians died.

Quote: What contribution? I'm still waiting to hear what EOKA contributed to this island.

If you read carefully what I have written that cause your reaction, I've said that they did not achieve their goals, and they did make mistakes. Their contribution is the fact that they resisted the colonial power and imo they accelerated their departure. Arguably if EOKA didn't resist the British we could have independency anyway but we don't really know. Even so they proposed some plans, they didn't show any intention of leaving Cyprus and a main catalyst to the EOKA struggle was the governor's announcement that Cyprus due to its strategic location should never expect decolonisation. If the people who rule you say that, do you resist or you stand there and accept it?

ps undoubtly among the many EOKA fighters, there were the few 'murderers' I am willing to black label the whole organisation as terrorists/murderers because of the few war criminals.

[stavrizatz]

Also Irish Cypriot, I understand your view but I believe you don't know much about the Cyprop and the way the problem developed.
eg. Turkey come to cyprus to establish a North Cyprus territory, Turkey came to take a part of Cyprus. It took them 9 years to self-declare the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus for reasons that only them know. A Turkish Cypriot friend of mine told me it was because Rauf Denktash wanted to get reelected and because according to the Turkish constitution he couldn't be the leader for longer than 10 years, so he developed the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus and he stayed as leader for another 15 or so years. Also Greece as a democratic government (not the dictatorship that pretty much everyone opposed) support what Cypriots want and they had no intention to unite Cyprus to Greece if that was not what Cypriots wanted.

Anyway I guess DP wants to point out to you that he is a refugee and he has the right to return to his house in Lapithos. This fundamental human right is taken away by Turkey and he demands justice. Anan plan simply was not justice for him and the majority of Greek Cypriots. Looking back and the downdrain that we are going I might compromise with the unfair Anan plan

[Mete]

stavrizatz wrote:
EOKA did not exist in that period. You are refering to paramilitary groups with ex-EOKA element and EOKA B'.

See, it might not have existed on paper but it existed in reality in the form of paramilitary groups and Greek Cypriot policemen who acted like EOKA members. And to tell you the truth, I care more about 1963-1974 than before 1960. Because no matter what happened before, we had a new republic in 1960, a new beginning that could have worked if there was no EOKA/TMT mentality.

But neither the EOKA mentality nor the TMT mentality disappeared after 1960 and we had terrorists and murderers on both sides killing innocent civilians with the first sign of trouble. To me, it doesn't matter if they call themselves EOKA members, EOKA-B members, or something else. At the end of the day, these people killed innocent civilians and for that they are murderers, not heroes or freedom fighters.

And you know why I consider the whole organization as a terrorist organization? Because innocent civilian murderers of Dohni, Aloa, Sandallar and elsewhere are still free to roam in the south and in most cases, they're still considered "heroes" and they get medals for their "good work". If EOKA was a noble, honest freedom fighting organization, would these civilian killer "heroes" be tolerated and glorified by that organization?

[stavrizatz]

Again... I don't disagree with you the point you try to make and I don't justify 63-74 period in any way. However forget about that period because this thread is not about 63-74. EOKA finished in 1959, both in paper and in reality. EOKA mentality did not continiou after 1960

Quote: And you know why I consider the whole organization as a terrorist organization?

From what you say I get that you have liitle knowledge about what EOKA (not 63-74) did, perhaps you consider the whole organisation as terrorist because you don't question what they teach you.

[erolz]

stavrizatz wrote: Again... I don't disagree with you the point you try to make and I don't justify 63-74 period in any way. However forget about that period because this thread is not about 63-74. EOKA finished in 1959, both in paper and in reality. EOKA mentality did not continiou after 1960


Before 1960 you have Grivas and sub commanders like Yiorjardis leading a paramilitary organisation using violence to achieve the political goal of enosis against those it perceived to be enemies of enosis. After 1960 you have Grivas and sub commanders like Yiorjardis leading a paramilitary organisation against those it perceived to be enemies of enosis. The same people pursuing the same objective with the same commitment and same willingness to use violence as a means to achieving their political ends. Of course after 1960 they had the added advantages of being the government rather than enemies of it but other than that there is little distinction.

You may see a clear cut and total separation between EOKA pre 1960 and those acting after 1960 in paper and in reality but I do not. I suggest that this black and white total disconnection between EOKA pre 1960 and extremist Greek Cypriot elements post 1960 is a matter of convenience to you rather than anything based in actuality.

stavrizatz wrote:
Their contribution is the fact that they resisted the colonial power and imo they accelerated their departure.

And imo they delayed the end of British rule and created the 'ambient atmosphere' (to steal a phrase) that led to the disasters that subsequently befell Cyprus and Cypriots after the end of British rule.

stavrizatz wrote: Arguably if EOKA didn't resist the British we could have independency anyway but we don't really know.

Come on. It is entering the realms of fantasy imho to suggest that without EOKA Britain would today still rule Cyprus against the will of the Cypriot people/s. If we are to enter fantasy then what might have happened in Cyprus if instead of EOKA pursuing a Greek Cypriot only objective using violence as a means to achieving that end (and instead of TMT using violence to thwart it) we had had a pan Cypriot movement pursuing a pan Cypriot objective committed to passive non violent resistance. I believe than in such a scenario not only would Independence have been achievable sooner , with less bloodshed and suffering but that after independence the disasters that befell Cyprus and Cypriots would not have come to pass.

stavrizatz wrote: ps undoubtly among the many EOKA fighters, there were the few 'murderers' I am willing to black label the whole organisation as terrorists/murderers because of the few war criminals.

I do not find the argument that the 'few' civilians killed by EOKA pre 1960 (ie the 20 non Greek Cypriot and the many many more Greek Cypriot civilians) were the work of a few 'rouge' elements within EOKA's ranks operating on their own initiative and without approval of Grivas credible. The number of active combatant EOKA members at it's height is estimated to have been no more than 300 and Grivas was known for both his obsessive control, authoritarianism, discipline and ruthlessness. The number of civilian murders committed by EOKA is imo simply to high for it to be 'written off' as unsanctioned acts of rouge elements. within EOKA. The reality is I believe that had such rouge elements really existed within EOKA that acted in such a serious way without Grivas' approval (implicit or explicit) they would have been swiftly and ruthlessly disciplined for such acts and the example sent and received by others - just as those Greek Cypriot that Grivas labeled as traitors were. If you could be, as a Greek Cypriot, murdered by EOKA for being too sympathetic to a non enosis solution, or simply 'too communist' for Grivas' liking as some Greek Cypriot were, then certainly you could receive the same for undermining Grivas and the whole EOKA struggle by rogue acts of killing civilians without approval.

[Mete]

stavrizatz wrote:
Again... I don't disagree with you the point you try to make and I don't justify 63-74 period in any way. However forget about that period because this thread is not about 63-74. EOKA finished in 1959, both in paper and in reality. EOKA mentality did not continiou after 1960

Ok who killed Turkish Cypriots between 1963-1974 then? You're making a fool of yourself. It's like me claiming that TMT ceased to exist after 1960. It's not true. The number of people killed on both sides is a proof that both EOKA and TMT mentality continued on after 1960.

And this is the time period I care. I don't really care much about before 1960. If you want to consider EOKA members are "heroes" before 1960 because they resisted British, then fine, knock yourself out.

But how can we explain the killings between 1963-1974? One day some people fell off the sky and they started killing Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots who didn't agree with them out of the blue?

[depurple]

IrishCypriot
thanks for your reply:

I knew you had a house in the NTH at least you are honest like Erolz was to me in the past: That makes it good to deal with someone who is honest!

We are both on the same pedestal!
I am also a Cypriot:
What language I speak and what religion I follow should not be a mill stone around any-ones neck!

BUT I do hold a grudge against several past Cypriot identities:
1: I had my father cousin hanged by the British in 1955:

2: I had an Uncle killed leaving 6 children by the Turks in 1974:

3: I had another Uncle with 3 children killed by EOKA B in 1964:

4: My grandfather lost everything he owned that he bought with over 50 years of working in Australia to the Turkish invasion during the agreed ceasefire!
So you see there are not many people I trust or respect:
Specially Politicians:
I know Cypriot history like I know the 233 Deep Purple songs on Guitar,Keyboards and also vocals:
So you see I have to attack self centered people WHO have made money from the misfortunes of the unfortunate in Cyprus! WHY?
Because they deserve it!
Someone NY friend has made millions in the NTH and also in the STH!
While other have been suffering!
Call me Robin Hood!
Call me Bob Geldorf!
Call me Oprah!
But there are many who have the answers to all the question we all want to KNOW but wont open there stupid corrupt mouths! WHY?
Because it is full of US $100 dollar notes and you know the old saying?
"Don't talk with your mouth FULL!"
cheers!

[stavrizatz]

Mete wrote:
Quote: Ok who killed Turkish Cypriots between 1963-1974 then?
Paramilitary groups developed by some ex-EOKA men such as Yorgadgis, Greek freeland gangs of armed irregulars and lastly TMT.

Mete wrote:
Quote: And this is the time period I care. I don't really care much about before 1960.

You're welcome to continue the conversation about 63-74 in a new thread.

[depurple]

stavrizatz
I have said this many times:
EOKA heroes or what you call them where FOOLED by Greece into believing to fight for THEIR freedom or ENOSIS or whatever: All Greece had to do is TELL the truth to these poor misguided fools:
Tell them that the Cypriots still owe money to Britain for the infrastructure:
Tell them that Greece wanted to make sure that
Cyprus would never become a communist country and that is why they brought in Grivas who would kill his OWN mother if she wore a RED dress: stavrizatz
There is MUCH more than you have been told by your father about the EOKA:
I have had MANY relations in EOKA A and EOKA B and they ALL have different reasons for FIGHTING for Cyprus! WHY?
Because they where brainwashed and told different stories of what is the best for Cyprus:
BUT again let me tell you: You had to be a COMPLETE FOOL not to realize that Turkey was grinding the knife and WAITING for the realize to F**K UP:(Which They did with EOKA & ENOSIS):
BUT then you still have some EOKA who say we WON! We WON!
Turkey tried to take all of Cyprus and we stopped them!
Dream On! Dream ON!
I hate to tell you this:
Turkey could taken ALL of Cyprus in 74 and the only thing that did stop them where the British!
Ask all my relatives from Engommi about the British in Dekelia and what they did to the Turkish Army!
Also the other fallacy of why did Britain as a guarantor turn a blind eye to Turkey?
Simple my Friend!
"Never piss in the old well"
That is exactly what EOKA did to Britain!
If I where you stavrizatz I would ask what happened to the great EOKA heroes when Turkey invaded Cyprus:
And while you are searching ask what happen to Greece! The mighty light of democracy!
cheers
PS Maybe there batteries went FLAT!

[stavrizatz]

Erolz it seems that you are an expert in fabrication and propaganda.

Before 1960 you have Grivas and sub commanders like Yiorjardis leading a paramilitary organisation using violence to achieve the political goal of enosis against those it perceived to be enemies of enosis.

1. the most important figure of EOKA was Makarios not Yorgadgis.
2. leading a resistance movement with the support of the extreme majority of the people
3. against a suppressive colonial power that had no intention to move from the island.

After 1960 you have Grivas and sub commanders like Yiorjardis leading a paramilitary organisation against those it perceived to be enemies of enosis. The same people pursuing the same objective with the same commitment and same willingness to use violence as a means to achieving their political ends.

1. the paramilitary organisation was not just one
2. rivas went to Greece after 1960 and return in 67 to form EOKA B.
3. Mainly different people,
4. pursuing similar but not the same objectives,
5. Fighting under totally different circumstances
6. Those paramilitary groups did not have the wide support of the public.

Of course after 1960 they had the added advantages of being the government rather than enemies of it but other than that there is little distinction.

Brilliant observation

Quote: You may see a clear cut and total separation between EOKA pre 1960 and those acting after 1960 in paper and in reality but I do not. I suggest that this black and white total disconnection between EOKA pre 1960 and extremist Greek Cypriot elements post 1960 is a matter of convenience to you rather than anything based in actuality.

Please prove me wrong with reliable sources and I will apologise for my ignorance.

Erolz wrote:
Quote: If we are to enter fantasy then what might have happened in Cyprus if instead of EOKA pursuing a Greek Cypriot only objective using violence as a means to achieving that end (and instead of TMT using violence to thwart it) we had had a pan Cypriot movement pursuing a pan Cypriot objective committed to passive non violent resistance. I believe than in such a scenario not only would Independence have been achievable sooner , with less bloodshed and suffering but that after independence the disasters that befell Cyprus and Cypriots would not have come to pass.

Once you don't live in fantasy also tell us why it took Britain 82 years to leave Cyprus. Also tell us why the Cypriot passive resistance failed during all those years. Or do you suggest it was a coincidence that the British departed only after such a violent conflict.

[stavrizatz]

Above sorry for not quoting Erolz words, I didn't mean to

[IrishCypriot]

stavrizatz - First of all, Greece was under militiary rule due to a coup detat, that my friend in no democracy. Secondly, If the cypriots voted democratically in say 1968 to unite with greece, you can rest assured that there would have been an overall majority vote in favour due to the greek cypriots being a majority people on the island. What I say is that the Turkish cypriots had every right to choose for themselfs what they wanted and that would not have happened. In northern ireland we have a population balance of about 55% Unionist and 45% Nationalist. In all government bodies now set up, they have to be 50/50, that didnt happen in cyprus. Personally I dont think turkey came to cyprus to develop a state loyal to turkey. I think turkey had that intention but accepted an independent cyprus ruled by both greek and turkish cypriots. What happened between 1963 & 1974 left turkey with no choice but to protect the turkish cypriot minorities. Take a look at Kosovo, when the serbs where slaughtering people who where the first nato troops into muslim areas, "turkey" and why? Strategic importance? Oil reserves? Im no supporter of Turkey but I do know that had tukey not gone to Cyprus in 1974, I would not be here today because my father would not be here today. Dont miss interpert what i am saying because what happened after 1974 when turkey stayed in cyprus unlike kosovo where they have left created a very different intention by Turkey, they had achieved their objective, to protect the turkish cypriots, but tukey, just as it always has been, got greedy and wanted to stay but a loyal state to turkey in cyprus gives them huge terratorial waters - where else would the turkish navy have been able to practice and drill in 1974, with the communists in the black sea? Not a chance. Tukey got greedy and exploited the situation, no different than Israel today in palestine. You see, i dont agree with the turkish republic of northern cyprus albeit, i might argue that there was a need for a state for the Turkish cypriots to have in cyprus to self rule themselves.

reply to depurple - Yes, my father has a house in North Cyprus in a north eastern distric of Lefkose/Nicosia. It is a house that has original turkish cypriot deeds... thankfully!! Nice house, quite part of lefkose/nicosia. I regret and feel sorry for your story. Unfortunately there are too many stories of the same or similar content from such a small island. It is so sad. But it was all because a few countries wanted to show the world that they were the superpower in the mediteranian.................................. Britain had trouble at home in northern ireland and was fighting a gurilla war againts the Provisional Irish Republican Army and could not amass its forces to Cyprus with Russia keeping its red eye on everything. Turkey had to show the world that you cant mess with them while everyone thought they were bluffing except for the cypriots and Greece was casually trying to sneakily take over cyprus by sending the odd national guard here and there in overnight transports.... sh*t happens, its just a shame it happened to cyprus

[Mete]

stavrizatz wrote:
Paramilitary groups developed by some ex-EOKA men such as Yorgadgis, Greek freeland gangs of armed irregulars and lastly TMT.

So you admit that there were ex-EOKA men and you admit (I'm assuming) that their aim was still Enosis. Same people, same goal, only different time period! And you still claim that there's a difference between EOKA and these paramilitary groups. For me, there's no difference. At the end of the day, Turkish Cypriots were being killed by these groups, whether they called themselves EOKA or something else, it doesn't matter.
stavrizatz wrote:
You're welcome to continue the conversation about 63-74 in a new thread.

I just don't understand how you can separate before 1960 and after 1960 so clearly. You act like before 1960, there was a noble organization composed of freedom-fighters called EOKA (and for that, they're heroes), after 1960, it ceased to exist completely, and then some random people formed another completely different organization with completely different objectives, goals, and methods and this organization was not noble and they weren't freedom fighters. As a result, did horrible things to Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots that didn't agree with them and EOKA had nothing to do with them in any way.

This is just absurd. It's like me telling you that TMT ceased to exist after 1960 and what Turkish Cypriots had between 1963-1974 are paramilitary groups completely unrelated to TMT.

One last one, I don't buy "majority of Greek Cypriots did not support EOKA-B" either. Whether they supported or not, EOKA-B managed to organize a coup and kill a bunch of leftist Greek Cypriots... For that, they must have had a lot of support from the Greek Cypriot society. I'm not saying all Greek Cypriots agreed with them completely. All I'm saying is that majority of Greek Cypriots did not/could not do anything to stop them and sometimes when you can't stand against a minority group (if they were indeed minority among Greek Cypriots), you end up paying for their mistakes as a community and that's what happened in 1974. Keep this in mind.