69 million page views


Reader comment on item: Turkey in Cyprus vs. Israel in Gaza
in response to reader comment: "London and Lausanne" has a nicer ring but either way it was a British sellout of a helpless minority.

Submitted by Ianus (Poland), Sep 14, 2010 at 06:01

Caleb ,

> Ianus, your remarks grow too hysterical and overwrought (too "Greek", that is to say) to merit serious reply, <

Having been exposed on so many occasions your lies need a very good hiding place now to be safe from any prying eye of common sense and decency . It would be best if you kept them there. But no ! With every reply you bring forth more of them.

> but one statement is so outrageous it MUST be corrected:

"Now if the British were at any time serious about the Zurich-London Agreements , then why didn't they decalre war on Turkey the moment the latter proceeded to occupy the island militarily carrying out thereby the destruction of all the provisions of the afrementioned agreements ?"

> Anyone familiar with the events of July, 1974 knows well that Turkish Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit flew to London on July 17 and **begged** Harold Wilson to honor Britain's 1960 pledges and intervene on Cyprus. <

Now you can't correct a right statement with a lie, Turk , and speak of anyone "familiar with the events of July" as if you were one of them !

I will reply to your lie with the words of Presidnent Johnson who in 1964 wrote to another Turkish Prime Minister bent on the invasion and occupation of Cyprus) as follows :

" It is my impression that you believe that such intervention by Turkey is permissible under the provisions of the Treaty of Guarantee of 1960. I must call your attention, however, to our understanding that the proposed intervention by Turkey would be for the purpose of supporting an attempt by Turkish Cypriot leaders to partition the island, a solution which is specifically excluded by the Treaty of Guarantee. Further, that treaty requires consultation among the guarantor powers."

I invite you to show me the article of the Zurich-London agreement which allows any guarantor country to unilaterally send a big army of invasion, conquer 40% of the island, expel 200 000 of its inhabitants and commit innumerable crimes against humanity in the process and frees the remaining ones from the duty to defend Cyprus against such an aggressor with all possible means ?

> The position of Her Majesty's government: "Sorry, old boy. That was then; this is now."<

Having received the full diplomatic and military support from Kissinger and the 6th US Fleet to go ahead with the invasion Ecevit flew to London to just promise he would not attack the British bases on Cyprus. In exchange Britain promised to support the US-Turkish war on Cyprus even though as the guarantor country Britain was obliged to start a war against the Turkish aggression the momemnt the first Turkish troops landed in Pentemili which was a casus belli as it menat threat to the integrity and independence of Cyprus.

But the perfidious Albion chose a different course of action. it joined hands wiuth the US and Moslem aggressor against the kaffir victim just like it had done in Palestine siding with the Arabs against the Jews.


Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2024 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)