View allAll Photos Tagged Slogan,
"Look for strengths in people, not weakness, for good, not evil. Most of us find what we search for."
This I might say is the best, least remembered advice given here.
One of Chennai's lovely quirks of public space are these series of inspirational and motivational wall slogans in several areas of the city. This sequence is from along GN Chetty Road in Chennai as you approach Gemini Flyover and is one of the longest stretches.
Title "Nikon Slogan"
EHBD everyone.
Another SOOC
Listening to Enrique Iglesias - Push - Feat Lil Wayne
(those who can't access to YouTube, go to songza and do a search.
In this odd, confusing era of fake news and alternative truth (?!) This is true: Facts matter #IAMALIBRARIAN
The "The Four Cardinal [or: Basic] Principles" (四项基本原则, sì xiàng jīběn yuánzé) outlined by Deng Xiaoping at 1979 (and a cornerstone of "邓小平理论, Dèng Xiǎopíng Lǐlùn, 'Deng Xiaoping Theory'"):
坚持社会主义道路
Jiānchí shèhuìzhŭyì dàolù
Uphold [or: Keep to] the Socialist Road [that is, the basic spirit of Communism],
坚持人民民主专政
Jiānchí rénmín mínzhŭ zhuānzhèng
Uphold the People's Democratic Dictatorship [the "dictatorship of the proletariat"],
坚持共产党的领导
Jiānchí gòngchăndăng delĭngdăo
Uphold the Leadership of the Communist Party,
坚持马克思列宁主义毛泽东思想 !
Jiānchí Măkèsī Lièníng zhŭyì Máo Zédōng Sīxiăng !
Uphold Marxism-Leninism - Mao Zedong Thought !
"Enlarge and crop" from image posted previously ("Zhengzhou, Guómián Liù Chăng (国棉六厂) terminal, 1983," www.flickr.com/photos/lwdemery/3397886580/).
I saw these same slogans, although arranged differently (horizontally), in Beijing:
www.flickr.com/photos/lwdemery/5025808214
1983 August 18.
I'm really not sure about TNT's new slogan "The People Network".
It makes them sound like they are people traffickers.
The parcel delivery company previously used the slogan “Sure We Can”, however the new tagline is said to reflect the company’s strong relationship it has with its customers.
TNT has said the new slogan is “a natural choice for these businesses because it believes the client cannot be a barcode but needs to be treated personally."
get fat or die trying (see note :) )
I thought this was on the border of funny and sad.... And so i thought I'd put it up...
welcome, redditers & stumblers!
exp 457
I think this photo is in, or near, 中山路, Zhōngshān lù.
(The above is not correct; see below.)
The slogan reads 同心同德 ・振兴中华, Tóngxīntóngdé, zhènxīng Zhōnghuá, roughly "Dedicate heart and soul to the same cause: Revitalize the Chinese nation."
1983 September 30.
Drawn after skimming through the "autobiography" of Pu Yi, a.k.a. The Last Emperor of China. The paper was very rough, handmade in Thailand. It absorbed the tea quickly, and slowed down my pen and paintbrush. To see more from the Calendar Girls series: elizabethbriel.com/gallery/calendar-girls.php
DISCLAIMER
Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based historical facts. BEWARE!
.
Some background:
The mighty Suchoj SuCh-1 started its life in early March 1943, when the Sukhoi OKB finished work on the design of a high-speed fighter with a unique powerplant arrangement. The aircraft was an all-metal low-wing monoplane with conventional tail surfaces. The three-section wings had constant dihedral and basically trapezoidal planform; the stabilizers had zero dihedral.
Two Klimov M-107 water-cooled Vee-12 engines, each with a. take-off power of 1 ,600 hp (1,193 kW) and a maximum design power of 1,500 hp (1,119 kW) at 5,500 m (18,045 ft), were mounted in the center fuselage in a staggered-tandem arrangement: the front engine was offset to starboard and of the rear one to port. Thus, the total power was increased but the drag was the same as for a single-engined aircraft, which was expected to increase fight speed considerably. Consequently, the project was internally designated 'I-2M107', literally "Article powered by two M107 engines".
Furthermore, the left cylinder bank of the front engine and the right cylinder bank of the rear engine were disposed vertically, so that each engine had one set of exhaust stubs on top of the fuselage and one on the fuselage side. Both engines drove a single three blade tractor propeller of 4.0 m (13 tt 2 in) diameter via parallel extension shafts and a common reduction gearbox. Both water radiators were located side by side in a chin housing, while the oil coolers were buried in the wings. The total fuel capacity of the four tanks arranged in the center fuselage was 1,113 litres (244.86 Imp. gal).
Because of the power plant arrangement and the large ground angle (necessary to give adequate ground clearance for the large propeller) the cockpit was offset to port and placed ahead of the wing leading edge to provide better forward visibility on take-off and landing. The cockpit was protected by a bulletproof windscreen, a front armor plate and an armored backrest; the armor weight totaled 70kg (154Ib).
The main landing gear units with 800 x 280 mm (31.5x11 in) wheels retracted inwards into the wing roots and the 400 x 150 mm (15.7 x 5.9 in) tail wheel retracted aft. The fighter's armament consisted of two wing-mounted 12.7-mm Berezin UBS machine-guns firing outside the propeller disc and a single 20-mm ShVAK cannon firing through the propeller hub*.
A full-scale mock-up was inspected in December 1943, and with German long range bombers threatening the Western front line as well as the lack of a fast and powerful fighters to intercept them (the earlier MiG-5 had turned out to be a disappointment, and Mikoyan's I-211/221 family if high altitude fighters also suffered from serious technical problems at that time), OKB Suchoj received an immediate go-ahead for further development of the SuCh-1, how the I-2M107 was now officially called, since Vladimir A. Chizhevskiy took lead of the project.
In the course of 1944 three prototypes went through a fast development program. While the aircraft itself was easy to handle, overheating problems and trouble with the gearbox for the two engines could only partly be rectified - esp. the power transmission should remain the SuCh-1s Achilles Heel.
Anyway, the Su-5 was ready for service introduction towards late 1944, and the powerful type was exclusively to be used as an interceptor. Several improvements had been made, compared to the prototypes: now two slightly more powerful Klimov VK-107A engines were used, which were better suited for high altitude operations, and the chin-mounted water cooler was considerably enlarged. The oil coolers had been re-designed and they were now placed under the wing roots.
The wing span had been extended by 6' and a bigger (now 4.3m diameter!), four-bladed propeller was added in order to improve performance at high altitude. No pressurized cabin was installed, but the cockpit received an extended glazing for better all-round field of vision.
Armament had also been augmented: now a Nudelman N-23 23mm cannon was firing through the propeller hub, and the number of UBS machine-guns in the wings was increased to four.
As initial duty experience was gathered, it became quickly clear that the firepower had to be augmented, so that the propeller-hub-mounted 23mm cannon was quickly replaced by a Nudelman-Richter NR-37 37mm cannon, and the four wing-mounted UBS machine guns were replaced by two 20-mm ShVAK cannons or even two Nudelman N-23 23mm cannons - the latter became the production standard from March 1945 on, even though the type's designation did not change.
Experience also showed that the overheating problem had been cured, but the complicated gear box tended to malfunction, esp. when full power was called for in aerial combat: high G forces took their toll and damaged the bearings, even warping the extension shafts and structural parts, so that some SuCh-1 were literally torn apart in mid-air.
The high torque powers of the large propeller also took their toll on handling: starting and landing was described as "hazardous", esp. when the fuel tanks were empty or in cross winds.
Consequently, SuCh-1 pilots were warned to engage into any dogfight or enter close combat with single-engined enemy fighters, and just focus on large enemy aircraft.
On the other side, the SuCh-1's powerful cannon armament made it a deadly foe: a single hit with the NR-37 cannon could down an aircraft, and its top speed of roundabout 700 km/h (435 mph) was more than enough for the Luftwaffe's heavy bomber types like the He 177.
Several engine and armament experiments were undertaken. For instance, at least one SuCh-1 was outfitted with a Nudelman-Sooranov NS-45 45mm cannon firing through the propeller hub, even a 57mm cannon was envisaged. Furthermore, one airframe was prepared to carry two Charomskiy M-30V 12 cylinder diesel engines, in order to produce a heavy long-range escort fighter (internally called I-2M30V).
In order to minimize the torque problems a contraprop arrangement with two three-bladed propellers and a diameter of only 3.6m was under development.
All in all only 120 of these powerful machines were built until the end of hostilities, as the feared mass attacks of German long range bombers did not materialize. as the Su-7 was complicated to operate and jet engines promised a far more efficient way of propulsion for high speeds, the type was already retired in 1947 and replaced by 1st generation jet fighters like the Yak-15 and MiG-9, which carried a similar armament, attained a better performance (except for the range) but weighed only half of the large and heavy SuCh-1.
.
General characteristics
Crew: One
Length: 11.75 m (38 ft 5 3/4 in)
Wingspan: 13.85 m (45 ft 3 1/4 in)
Height: 5.30 m (17 ft 4 in)
Empty weight: 5.250 kg (11.565 lb)
Max. take-off weight: 8.100 kg (17.840 lb)
Powerplant:
2× Klimov VK-107A liquid-cooled V12 engines with an output of 1.650 hp (1.210 kW) each at sea level and 900 hp (650 kW) at 8.300m (27.220 ft)
Performance:
Maximum speed: 720 km/h (447 mph) at height, clean configuration
Range: 750 km (465 mi)
Service ceiling: 11.700 m (38.400 ft)
Rate of climb: 876 m/mim (2.850 ft/min)
Armament:
1× Nudelman-Richter NR-37 37mm cannon with 60 RPG, firing through the propeller hub
2× Nudelman N-23 23mm cannons with 120 RPG in the wings
Many different cannon and machine gun arrangements coulod be found, though.
*Information about the conceptual Suchoj I-2M107 was primarily gathered from the book 'OKB Suchoj', written by Yefim Gordon & Dmitriy Komissarov; Hersham (UK), 2010.
.
The kit and its assembly (a long story!):
This abomination of an aircraft is/was real, even though the I-2M107 was never built – the fictional name Suchoj-Chizhevskiy SuCh-1 was actually chosen because I could not find any plausible Su-X code for a WWII fighter. Vladimir A. Chizhevskiy actually joined the Suchoj OKB in mid WWII, so I deemed this alternative to be plausible.
I had this on the agenda for a long time, but the horrors of kitbashing kept me from building it - until now. The current Anthony P memorial Group Build (for the deceased fellow member at whatifmodelers.com, RIP) was a good motivation to tackle this brute thing. Fortunately, I already had some major ingredients in store, so work could start asap.
From that, anything else was improvised from the scrap box, and with only a three side view of the I-2M107 as guidance. It became a true Frankenstein creation with...
● Fuselage and inner wings from the (horrible) NOVO Attacker
● Wings from an Italeri Fw 190 D-9 attached to them
● Nose is a resin Griffon from an Avro Lincoln conversion set from OzMods
● Tail cone is a radar nose from an F-4J Phantom II
● Tail fin is a horizontal stabilizer from a Matchbox SB2C Helldiver
● Vertical stabilizers come from a Matchbox Me 410
● Oil coolers are modified front landing gear wells from two Revell G.91 kits
● Cockpit hood comes from a Revell P-39 Airacobra
● Landing gear comes from an Italeri Fw 190 D-9, covers were modified/improvised
● Main wheels belong to a MPM Ryan Dark Shark
● Tail wheel belongs to a Matchbox Harrier
● The propeller was scratched, IIRC from a Grumman Hellcat drop tank front and blades from an Airfix A-1 Skyraider. Inside, a metal axis was mounted.
.
Work started with the fuselage and the wings as separate segments.
The Attacker fuselage lost its fin and the cockpit and air intakes were simply cut away, just as the tail pipe. The resin Griffon was slightly shortened at the front, but more or less directly attached to the fuselage, after I had cut out openings for the four rows of exhaust nozzles.
Then, the new tail cone was glued onto the end and the original fairings for the Attacker's stabilizer cut away and sanded even - anything had to be made new.
The wings were a bit tricky. I had hoped to use the Attacker's OOB wings, but these were not only much too small and did not have the proper shape, they also lacked landing gear wells!
Finding a solution was not easy, and I had to improvise. After some trials I decided to cut the Attacker wing span at about the width where the guns are located, and then add Fw 190 wings.
The depth would be fine, even though the Fw 190 wings were a bit thicker, and they offered a leading edge kink which was good for the original and characteristic I-2M107's wing root extensions. The latter were sculpted from a 6mm thick core or styrene sheet, added to the Attacker parts' leading edge, and the rest, as well as the lacking Attacker wing's thickness, sculpted with 2C and later NC putty.
Furthermore I cut out and sculpted landing gear wells, another challenging, since these had to cover the Attacker/Fw 190 parts' intersection! LOTS of putty work, sanding and shaving, but as a benefit I was able to use the Attacker kit's original wing/fuselage joints. Effectively, my placement turned out to be a bit far outside, so the track appears too wide - the price to pay when you work on single parts. Anyway, I left it was it turned out, as a major correction at a late working stage would mean to tear anything apart again...
Back to the nose: adding the propeller and the cockpit into the massive nose was the next working station. The propeller had to be huge, and also needed a rather big spinner. A contraprop was ruled out, even though it would have looked great here. But eventually I settled for a scratch-built thing, made from a teardrop-shaped drop tank front onto which the four blades from a A-1 Skyraider were glued. Probably the biggest prop I have ever put onto a 1:72 scale model! Since the resin nose was massive, drilling a hole and adding a metal axis to the propeller was enough.
With that in place I started carving out a cockpit opening - it worked better and easier than expected with a mini drill and a coarse shaving head! The opening is still rather small, a seat and a pilot hardly fit, but it works - I found a rather smallish pilot figure, and added a seat and some other small details from the scrap box, just to have something inside.
For a canopy I found a very old (30 years, I guess...) clear part from a Revell P-39 Airacobra in the scrap box, which was almost perfect in shape and width. It was a bit blind and stained with ancient enamel paint, but some wet sanding and serious polishing almost got it back to translucent status. Since I would not open the cockpit, this was a sufficient solution.
The asymmetrical cockpit opening was, in an initial step, faired with styrene strips, for a rough outline, and then sculpted with 2C and later NC putty, blending it into the rest of the fuselage.
For the tail surfaces, the SB2C stabilizer was cut away at its base - it is not a bad donation piece, its shape and rudder come pretty close to the I-2M107's original design!
The stabilizers I used on my kitbash come from a Me 410, and their leading edge was a cut away so that the sweep angle would be a bit larger. They lack depth, compared to the I-2M107's original design, but since the wings have become more slender, too, I think it's a good compromise, and the best what I had at hand in the spares stash.
Finally, and before detail work could start, the wings were attached to the fuselage. I eventually set them back by ~6mm, so that the new, extended leading edge would match the respective fairing on the fuselage. The resulting gap at the trailing edge was, again, filled with 2C and NC putty.
A personal change was a different oil cooler arrangement. The original location was to be in the wings' leading edge, just in front of the landing gear wells - but that appeared a bit doubtful, as I could not find a plausible solution where the exit for the air would be? Consequently, and in order to avoid even more messy putty sculpting on the wings, I decided to re-locate the oil coolers completely, into shallow, tunnel-like fairings under the wing roots, not unlike the radiator arrangement on a Spitfire or Bf 109.
In order to check the surface quality I decided to add a coat of grey primer, once the fuselage/wing segments had been connected. This showed only minor flaws, but made another turn with NC putty and wet sanding necessary.
Now it was time for finishing touches, e .g. mounting the landing gear, completing the cockpit and adding exhaust stubs - cut individually from HO scale model railroad roof tiles and inserted into the four fuselage fairings.
The canopy was fixed into place with white glue, which also helped closing some small gaps.
.
Painting and markings:
While the I-2M107 looks odd, to say the least, I wanted to keep the paint scheme rather simple and quasi-authentic. I went for a pale grey/green camouflage, used e. g. on late war Yakovlev Yak-3 fighters.
Basic colors are Humbrol 31 (Slate Grey, it has a very greenish, even teal, hue), ModelMaster 1740 (Dark Gull Grey, FS 36231) and Humbrol 167 (Barley Grey) for the lower sides with a wavy waterline. Since only marginal surface details were left over, I decided to fake panels and panel lines with paint.
Panels were simulated with lighter shades of the basic tones (RLM 62 from ModelMaster, Humbrol 140 and 127 below), panel lines were painted with highly thinned grey acrylic paint and a special brush - in German it's called a 'Schlepppinsel', it's got very long hairs and is also used to paint scallops on car models, and similar things are used for real car tuning/custom paintwork, too.
Sure, the painted panel lines are a bit rough, but I did not want to risk any damage through manual engraving on the rather delicate mixed-media surface of the kitbashed model. For an overall look or first impression it's very good, though.
As 'highlights' I added a white spinner and half of the fin was painted white, too.
The decals were puzzled together. The flashes and the tactical code number come from a Hobby Boss La-7, the Red Stars, IIRC, belong to a vintage MiG-21F from Hasegawa. The "Rodinu" slogan actually belongs to a 1:35 Soviet Tank decals set.
Finally, after some additional dry painting with light grey, some oil stains around the engines and coolers and soot stains at the exhaust stubs and guns (painted, plus some grinded graphite, as it yields a nice, metallic shimmer that looks like oil or burnt metal), everything was sealed under a coat of matt acrylic varnish.
If it had been built, the Suchoj I-2M107 must have been an impressive aircraft - it was bigger than a P-47 Thunderbolt or an A-1 Skyraider, and one can only wonder how its field performance would have been?
Similar concepts had been underway in UK, too, e. g. for a heavy naval attack aircraft, but the I-2M107 with its asymmetrical cockpit and engine arrangement were unique. A worthy whif, even if some details like the landing gear or the borrowed nose section are not 100% 'correct'.
"結束專政 還政於民" "end dictationship power to the people"
Clashes broke out between Hong Kong police and protesters on the 70th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China on Wednesday, with officers firing tear gas in Wong Tai Sin, Tsuen Wan and Sha Tin.
Meanwhile, thousands marched across Hong Kong island to protest the local administration as well as the Chinese Communist Party.
In direct opposition to the celebrations in Beijing, marchers said that they were marking a “day of mourning.”
“There is no National Day celebration, only a national tragedy,” demonstrators shouted – a new slogan coined specifically for October 1.
The Civil Human Rights Front applied to host a peaceful march on Tuesday, but police said that the organisers were unable to guarantee that no clashes would take place.
An attempt to appeal the ban failed on Monday.
Nevertheless, four pro-democracy activists – veterans Lee Cheuk-yan, Albert Ho, “Long Hair” Leung Kwok-hung as well as Figo Chan – said they would march from Causeway Bay despite the police ban
Separately, violence broke out at rallies held in Wong Tai Sin, Tuen Mun, Tsuen Wan and Sha Tin.
Protesters planned to hold simultaneous rallies across different districts in Hong Kong, starting from 1:30pm.
As of 3pm, police fired tear gas near Lung Cheung Road in Wong Tai Sin, as well as near Yuen Wo Road in Sha Tin.
Sha Tin saw protesters throw petrol bombs and bricks, as police responded with tear gas.
In light of Tuesday’s planned protests, the metro system was put on lockdown. As of lunchtime, MTR station closures included Mong Kok, East Tsim Sha Tsui, Tsuen Wan, Tai Wo Hau, Kwai Hing, Kwai Fong, Sham Shui Po, Prince Edward, Yau Ma Tei, Sai Ying Pun, Admiralty, Wan Chai, Causeway Bay, Diamond Hill, Wong Tai Sin, Sha Tin, Che Kung Temple, Tsuen Wan West, AsiaWorld-Expo and Tuen Mun.
Light rail and Airport Express services are also restricted.
Speaking before the Hong Kong Island march, veteran Labour Party politician Lee Cheuk-yan said that the protest was to mourn “70 years of suppression” at the hands of the Chinese regime.
“We are mourning those who sacrificed for democracy in China,” Lee said.
“In 70 years of Communist Party rule, there are lots of sacrifices, human rights abuses, and the [suppression] of the rights of people in Hong Kong and China.”
“We also condemn the fact that the Hong Kong government, together with the Chinese government, deny the people of Hong Kong the right to democracy.”
Lee also called for the vindication of the 1989 Tiananmen Massacre and the end of one-party rule in mainland China. During the march, he also called for a minute of silence in remembrance of the victims of Chinese rule.
However, crowds of black-clad protesters did not always follow the lead of the veteran pan-democrats, with some opting to chant the familiar slogans such as “Liberate Hong Kong, the revolution of our time.”
A protester surnamed Wong said that it was important to take to the streets on October 1 as a show of defiance to Chinese President Xi Jinping.
“Xi wants the world to think everyone in China loves him. A lot of people here feel the opposite,” he told HKFP. He also wore a Guy Fawkes mask – a protest icon made popular in the dystopian film V for Vendetta.
Rain, an 18-year-old university student, told HKFP that she didn’t want the local protest movement to lose steam, and that she wanted to come out to insist on her freedom of assembly.
“The police are putting a curfew on Hong Kong, making people scared to come out,” she said. “We need to show that we will not give up on our five demands.”
During the march, protesters targeted billboards and posters celebrating National Day, often vandalising them with spray paint.
Similar to the “anti-totalitarianism” march on Sunday, the Hong Kong island protests also saw vandalism against properties owned by food and catering firm Maxim’s, including local branches of Starbucks Coffee
Since June, large-scale peaceful protests against a bill that would have enabled extraditions to China have evolved into sometimes violent displays of dissent over Beijing’s encroachment, democracy and alleged police brutality.
Though the bill has been withdrawn, demonstrators are demanding a fully independent probe into police behaviour, amnesty for those arrested, universal suffrage and a halt to the characterisation of protests as “riots.”
www.hongkongfp.com/2019/10/01/day-mourning-protests-erupt...
【明報專訊】民陣原定昨日發起「沒有國慶只有國殤」集會及遊行，但遭警方反對，上訴亦被駁回。多名民主派元老級成員包括民主黨何俊仁、工黨李卓人等，以個人名義呼籲市民上街。被問到會否擔心被控「煽惑他人參與非法集結」等罪名，發起人稱會承擔法律風險，亦勸喻參與者衡量風險。大批市民昨午身穿黑衣自發到場，擠滿軒尼詩道，遊行發起人之一、民陣副召集人陳皓桓估計有10多萬人參與。
民主派前立法會議員何俊仁、李卓人、梁國雄、楊森，以及民陣副召集人陳皓桓昨承接民陣被否決的遊行路線，以個人身分發起遊行。昨午1時起，大批身穿黑衣的市民陸續前往維園附近「個人遊」，灣仔修頓球場4個看台亦坐滿市民，不時高叫「五大訴求，缺一不可」等口號，亦有市民自製「連儂牆」橫額。
李卓人梁國雄楊森等持橫額領頭
遊行隊頭下午1時15分由銅鑼灣東角道起步，由李卓人、梁國雄及楊森等手持「結束專政，還政於民」橫額出發，沿軒尼詩道遊行至中環遮打道。李卓人表示，要以遊行控訴中共剝奪港人民主權利，縮窄香港的自由空間。梁國雄稱昨日香港已進入「半戒嚴」狀態，明顯壓制港人遊行自由。
參與遊行的市民沿路高叫口號，亦有人撒溪錢及手持聯合國會旗。遊行隊頭下午1時45分左右到達灣仔站後，在修頓球場的市民匯合遊行隊伍，往中環方向前進，隊伍抵達金鐘附近後，有人走上連接太古廣場和金鐘廊的天橋，拆走國慶標語。
隊頭於下午近3時到達終點中環遮打道，陳皓桓呼籲參與者「流水式」散去，並以民陣過往舉辦遊行的經驗，估計有10多萬人參與。
昨日遊行途經的多個港鐵站都已封站，有示威者不滿港鐵做法，在多個港鐵站口堆放雜物、倒洗潔精水及打爛出口。
A good example of how to use the Atheist Bus Slogan generator to create a legacy fundraising campaign message (courtesy of Graham Richards).
Original bus photo: John Worth of atheistbus.org.uk.
Bus slogan generator: ruletheweb.co.uk/b3ta/bus/
Varosha - Maras is the southern quarter of the Famagusta, a de jure territory of Cyprus, currently under the control of Northern Cyprus. Varosha has a population of 226 in the 2011 Northern Cyprus census. The area of Varosha is 6.19 km2 (2.39 sq mi).
The name of Varosha derives from the Turkish word varoş (Ottoman Turkish: واروش, 'suburb'). The place where Varosha is located now was empty fields in which animals grazed.
In the early 1970s, Famagusta was the number-one tourist destination in Cyprus. To cater to the increasing number of tourists, many new high-rise buildings and hotels were constructed. During its heyday, Varosha was not only the number-one tourist destination in Cyprus, but between 1970 and 1974, it was one of the most popular tourist destinations in the world and was a favorite destination of such celebrities as Elizabeth Taylor, Richard Burton, Raquel Welch, and Brigitte Bardot.
Before 1974, Varosha was the modern tourist area of the Famagusta city. Its Greek Cypriot inhabitants fled during the Turkish invasion of Cyprus in 1974, when the city of Famagusta came under Turkish control, and it has remained abandoned ever since. In 1984 a U.N. resolution called for the handover of the city to UN control and said that only the original inhabitants, who were forced out, could resettle in the town.
Entry to part of Varosha was opened to civilians in 2017.
In August 1974, the Turkish Army advanced as far as the Green Line, a UN-patrolled demilitarized zone between the Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots, and controlled and fenced Varosha. Just hours before the Greek Cypriot and Turkish armies met in combat on the streets of Famagusta, the entire Greek Cypriot population fled to Paralimni, Dherynia, and Larnaca, fearing a massacre. The evacuation was aided and orchestrated by the nearby British military base. Paralimni has since become the modern-day capital of the Famagusta province of Greek Cypriot-led Cyprus.
The Turkish Army has allowed the entry of only Turkish military and United Nations personnel since 2017.
One such settlement plan was the Annan Plan to reunify the island that provided for the return of Varosha to the original residents. But this was rejected by Greek Cypriots in a 2004 referendum. The UN Security Council Resolution 550 states that it "considers attempts to settle any part of Varosha by people other than its inhabitants as inadmissible and calls for the transfer of this area to the administration of the United Nations".
The European Court of Human Rights awarded between €100,000 and €8,000,000 to eight Greek Cypriots for being deprived of their homes and properties as a result of the 1974 invasion. The case was filed jointly by businessman Constantinos Lordos and others, with the principal judgement in the Lordos case dating back to November 2010. The court ruled that, in the case of eight of the applicants, Turkey had violated Article 1 of Protocol 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights on the right of peaceful enjoyment of one's possessions, and in the case of seven of the applicants, Turkey had violated Article 8 on the right to respect for private and family life.
In the absence of human habitation and maintenance, buildings continue to decay. Over time, parts of the city have begun to be reclaimed by nature as metal corrodes, windows are broken, and plants work their roots into the walls and pavement and grow wild in old window boxes. In 2014, the BBC reported that sea turtles were observed nesting on the beaches in the city.
During the Cyprus Missile Crisis (1997–1998), the Turkish Cypriot leader, Rauf Denktaş, threatened to take over Varosha if the Cypriot government did not back down.
The main features of Varosha included John F. Kennedy Avenue, a street which ran from close to the port of Famagusta, through Varosha and parallel to Glossa beach. Along JFK Avenue, there were many well known high rise hotels including the King George Hotel, The Asterias Hotel, The Grecian Hotel, The Florida Hotel, and The Argo Hotel which was the favourite hotel of Elizabeth Taylor. The Argo Hotel is located near the end of JFK Avenue, looking towards Protaras and Fig Tree Bay. Another major street in Varosha was Leonidas (Greek: Λεωνίδας), a major street that came off JFK Avenue and headed west towards Vienna Corner. Leonidas was a major shopping and leisure street in Varosha, consisting of bars, restaurants, nightclubs, and a Toyota car dealership.
According to Greek Cypriots, 425 plots exist on the Varosha beach front, which extends from the Contandia hotel to the Golden Sands hotel. The complete number of plots in Varosha are 6082.
There are 281 cases of Greek Cypriots who filed to the Immovable Property Commission (IPC) of Northern Cyprus for compensation.
In 2020, Greek Cypriot Demetrios Hadjihambis filed a lawsuit seeking state compensation for financial losses.
The population of Varosha was 226 in the 2011 Northern Cyprus census.
In 2017, Varosha's beach was opened for the exclusive use of Turks (both Turkish Cypriots and Turkish nationals).
In 2019, the Government of Northern Cyprus announced it would open Varosha to settlement. On 14 November 2019, Ersin Tatar, the prime minister of Northern Cyprus, announced that Northern Cyprus aims to open Varosha by the end of 2020.
On 25 July 2019, Varosha Inventory Commission of Northern Cyprus started its inventory analysis on the buildings and other infrastructure in Varosha.
On 9 December 2019, Ibrahim Benter, the Director-General of the Turkish Cypriot EVKAF religious foundation's administration, declared all of Maraş/Varosha to be the property of EVKAF. Benter said "EVKAF can sign renting contracts with Greek Cypriots if they accept that the fenced-off town belongs to the Evkaf."
In 2019–20, inventory studies of buildings by the Government of Northern Cyprus were concluded. On 15 February 2020, the Turkish Bar Association organised a round table meeting at the Sandy Beach Hotel in Varosha, which was attended by Turkish officials (Vice President Fuat Oktay and Justice Minister Abdulhamit Gül), Turkish Cypriot officials, representatives of the Turkish Cypriot religious foundation Evkaf, and Turkish and Turkish Cypriot lawyers.
On 22 February 2020, Cyprus declared it would veto European Union funds to Turkish Cypriots if Varosha were opened to settlement.
On 6 October 2020, Ersin Tatar, the Prime Minister of Northern Cyprus, announced that the beach area of Varosha would reopen to the public on 8 October 2020. Turkey's president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, said Turkey fully supported the decision. The move came ahead of the 2020 Northern Cypriot presidential election, in which Tatar was a candidate. Deputy Prime Minister Kudret Özersay, who had worked on the reopening previously, said that this was not a full reopening of the area, that this was just a unilateral election stunt by Tatar. His People's Party withdrew from the Tatar cabinet, leading to the collapse of the Turkish Cypriot government. The EU's diplomatic chief condemned the plan and described it as a "serious violation" of the U.N. ceasefire agreement. In addition, he asked Turkey to stop this activity. The U.N. Secretary-General expressed concern over Turkey's decision.
On 8 October 2020, some parts of Varosha were opened from the Officers' Club of Turkish and Turkish Cypriot Army to the Golden Sands Hotel.
In November 2020, the Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and Turkey's ambassador to Nicosia, visited Varosha. In addition, the main avenue in Varosha has been renamed after Semih Sancar, Chief of the General Staff of Turkey from 1973 to 1978, a period including the 1974 Turkish invasion of Cyprus.
The European Parliament on 27 November, asked Turkey to reverse its decision to re-open part of Varosha and resume negotiations aimed at resolving the Cyprus problem on the basis of a bi-communal, bi-zonal federation and called on the European Union to impose sanctions against Turkey, if things do not change. Turkey rejected the resolution, adding that Turkey will continue to protect both its own rights and those of Turkish Cypriots. The Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus presidency also condemned the resolution.
On 20 July 2021, Tatar, the president of Northern Cyprus announced the start of the 2nd phase of the opening of Varosha. He encouraged Greek Cypriots to apply Immovable Property Commission of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus to claim their properties back if they have any such rights.
Bilal Aga Mosque, constructed in 1821 and taken out of service in 1974, was re-opened on 23 July 2021.
In response to a decision by the government of Turkish Cyprus, the presidential statement of the United Nations Security Council dated on 23 July said that settling any part of the abandoned Cypriot suburb of Varosha, "by people other than its inhabitants, is 'inadmissible'." The same day, Turkey rejected the presidential statement of the UNSC on Maras (Varosha), and said that these statements were based on Greek-Greek Cypriot propaganda, were groundless and unfounded claims, and inconsistent with the realities on the Island. On 24 July 2021, the presidency of Northern Cyprus condemned the presidential statement of the UNSC dated on 23 July, and stated that "We see and condemn it as an attempt to create an obstacle for the property-rights-holders in Varosha to achieve their rights".
By 1 January 2022, nearly 400,000 people had visited Varosha since its opening to civilians on 6 October 2020.
On 19 May 2022, Northern Cyprus opened a 600m long X 400m wide stretch of beach on the Golden Sands beach (from the King George Hotel to the Oceania Building) in Varosha for commercial use. Sun beds and umbrellas were installed.
UNFICYP said it would raise the decision taken by Turkish Cypriot authorities to open that stretch of beach in Varosha with the Security Council, spokesperson for the peacekeeping force Aleem Siddique said on Friday. The UN announced its "position on Varosha is unchanged and we are monitoring the situation closely".
In October 2022, the Turkish Cypriots announced that public institutions will be opened in the city.
In April 2023, Cleo Hotel, the 7-floor Golden Seaside Hotel, and the 3-star Aegean Hotel were purchased by a Turkish Cypriot businessman (from their Greek Cypriot owners) who will operate them within 2025.
On 10 August 2023, the Government of Northern Cyprus decided to construct a marina and tourist facility in Varosha.
Varosha was analyzed by Alan Weisman in his book The World Without Us as an example of the unstoppable power of nature.
Filmmaker Greek Cypriot Michael Cacoyannis described the city and interviewed its exiled citizens in the film Attilas '74, produced in 1975.
In 2021, the Belarusian group Main-De-Gloire dedicated a song to this city that has become a ghostly place.
Northern Cyprus, officially the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC), is a de facto state that comprises the northeastern portion of the island of Cyprus. It is recognised only by Turkey, and its territory is considered by all other states to be part of the Republic of Cyprus.
Northern Cyprus extends from the tip of the Karpass Peninsula in the northeast to Morphou Bay, Cape Kormakitis and its westernmost point, the Kokkina exclave in the west. Its southernmost point is the village of Louroujina. A buffer zone under the control of the United Nations stretches between Northern Cyprus and the rest of the island and divides Nicosia, the island's largest city and capital of both sides.
A coup d'état in 1974, performed as part of an attempt to annex the island to Greece, prompted the Turkish invasion of Cyprus. This resulted in the eviction of much of the north's Greek Cypriot population, the flight of Turkish Cypriots from the south, and the partitioning of the island, leading to a unilateral declaration of independence by the north in 1983. Due to its lack of recognition, Northern Cyprus is heavily dependent on Turkey for economic, political and military support.
Attempts to reach a solution to the Cyprus dispute have been unsuccessful. The Turkish Army maintains a large force in Northern Cyprus with the support and approval of the TRNC government, while the Republic of Cyprus, the European Union as a whole, and the international community regard it as an occupation force. This military presence has been denounced in several United Nations Security Council resolutions.
Northern Cyprus is a semi-presidential, democratic republic with a cultural heritage incorporating various influences and an economy that is dominated by the services sector. The economy has seen growth through the 2000s and 2010s, with the GNP per capita more than tripling in the 2000s, but is held back by an international embargo due to the official closure of the ports in Northern Cyprus by the Republic of Cyprus. The official language is Turkish, with a distinct local dialect being spoken. The vast majority of the population consists of Sunni Muslims, while religious attitudes are mostly moderate and secular. Northern Cyprus is an observer state of ECO and OIC under the name "Turkish Cypriot State", PACE under the name "Turkish Cypriot Community", and Organization of Turkic States with its own name.
Several distinct periods of Cypriot intercommunal violence involving the two main ethnic communities, Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots, marked mid-20th century Cyprus. These included the Cyprus Emergency of 1955–59 during British rule, the post-independence Cyprus crisis of 1963–64, and the Cyprus crisis of 1967. Hostilities culminated in the 1974 de facto division of the island along the Green Line following the Turkish invasion of Cyprus. The region has been relatively peaceful since then, but the Cyprus dispute has continued, with various attempts to solve it diplomatically having been generally unsuccessful.
Cyprus, an island lying in the eastern Mediterranean, hosted a population of Greeks and Turks (four-fifths and one-fifth, respectively), who lived under British rule in the late nineteenth-century and the first half of the twentieth-century. Christian Orthodox Church of Cyprus played a prominent political role among the Greek Cypriot community, a privilege that it acquired during the Ottoman Empire with the employment of the millet system, which gave the archbishop an unofficial ethnarch status.
The repeated rejections by the British of Greek Cypriot demands for enosis, union with Greece, led to armed resistance, organised by the National Organization of Cypriot Struggle, or EOKA. EOKA, led by the Greek-Cypriot commander George Grivas, systematically targeted British colonial authorities. One of the effects of EOKA's campaign was to alter the Turkish position from demanding full reincorporation into Turkey to a demand for taksim (partition). EOKA's mission and activities caused a "Cretan syndrome" (see Turkish Resistance Organisation) within the Turkish Cypriot community, as its members feared that they would be forced to leave the island in such a case as had been the case with Cretan Turks. As such, they preferred the continuation of British colonial rule and then taksim, the division of the island. Due to the Turkish Cypriots' support for the British, EOKA's leader, Georgios Grivas, declared them to be enemies. The fact that the Turks were a minority was, according to Nihat Erim, to be addressed by the transfer of thousands of Turks from mainland Turkey so that Greek Cypriots would cease to be the majority. When Erim visited Cyprus as the Turkish representative, he was advised by Field Marshal Sir John Harding, the then Governor of Cyprus, that Turkey should send educated Turks to settle in Cyprus.
Turkey actively promoted the idea that on the island of Cyprus two distinctive communities existed, and sidestepped its former claim that "the people of Cyprus were all Turkish subjects". In doing so, Turkey's aim to have self-determination of two to-be equal communities in effect led to de jure partition of the island.[citation needed] This could be justified to the international community against the will of the majority Greek population of the island. Dr. Fazil Küçük in 1954 had already proposed Cyprus be divided in two at the 35° parallel.
Lindley Dan, from Notre Dame University, spotted the roots of intercommunal violence to different visions among the two communities of Cyprus (enosis for Greek Cypriots, taksim for Turkish Cypriots). Also, Lindlay wrote that "the merging of church, schools/education, and politics in divisive and nationalistic ways" had played a crucial role in creation of havoc in Cyprus' history. Attalides Michael also pointed to the opposing nationalisms as the cause of the Cyprus problem.
By the mid-1950's, the "Cyprus is Turkish" party, movement, and slogan gained force in both Cyprus and Turkey. In a 1954 editorial, Turkish Cypriot leader Dr. Fazil Kuchuk expressed the sentiment that the Turkish youth had grown up with the idea that "as soon as Great Britain leaves the island, it will be taken over by the Turks", and that "Turkey cannot tolerate otherwise". This perspective contributed to the willingness of Turkish Cypriots to align themselves with the British, who started recruiting Turkish Cypriots into the police force that patrolled Cyprus to fight EOKA, a Greek Cypriot nationalist organisation that sought to rid the island of British rule.
EOKA targeted colonial authorities, including police, but Georgios Grivas, the leader of EOKA, did not initially wish to open up a new front by fighting Turkish Cypriots and reassured them that EOKA would not harm their people. In 1956, some Turkish Cypriot policemen were killed by EOKA members and this provoked some intercommunal violence in the spring and summer, but these attacks on policemen were not motivated by the fact that they were Turkish Cypriots.
However, in January 1957, Grivas changed his policy as his forces in the mountains became increasingly pressured by the British Crown forces. In order to divert the attention of the Crown forces, EOKA members started to target Turkish Cypriot policemen intentionally in the towns, so that Turkish Cypriots would riot against the Greek Cypriots and the security forces would have to be diverted to the towns to restore order. The killing of a Turkish Cypriot policeman on 19 January, when a power station was bombed, and the injury of three others, provoked three days of intercommunal violence in Nicosia. The two communities targeted each other in reprisals, at least one Greek Cypriot was killed and the British Army was deployed in the streets. Greek Cypriot stores were burned and their neighbourhoods attacked. Following the events, the Greek Cypriot leadership spread the propaganda that the riots had merely been an act of Turkish Cypriot aggression. Such events created chaos and drove the communities apart both in Cyprus and in Turkey.
On 22 October 1957 Sir Hugh Mackintosh Foot replaced Sir John Harding as the British Governor of Cyprus. Foot suggested five to seven years of self-government before any final decision. His plan rejected both enosis and taksim. The Turkish Cypriot response to this plan was a series of anti-British demonstrations in Nicosia on 27 and 28 January 1958 rejecting the proposed plan because the plan did not include partition. The British then withdrew the plan.
In 1957, Black Gang, a Turkish Cypriot pro-taksim paramilitary organisation, was formed to patrol a Turkish Cypriot enclave, the Tahtakale district of Nicosia, against activities of EOKA. The organisation later attempted to grow into a national scale, but failed to gain public support.
By 1958, signs of dissatisfaction with the British increased on both sides, with a group of Turkish Cypriots forming Volkan (later renamed to the Turkish Resistance Organisation) paramilitary group to promote partition and the annexation of Cyprus to Turkey as dictated by the Menderes plan. Volkan initially consisted of roughly 100 members, with the stated aim of raising awareness in Turkey of the Cyprus issue and courting military training and support for Turkish Cypriot fighters from the Turkish government.
In June 1958, the British Prime Minister, Harold Macmillan, was expected to propose a plan to resolve the Cyprus issue. In light of the new development, the Turks rioted in Nicosia to promote the idea that Greek and Turkish Cypriots could not live together and therefore any plan that did not include partition would not be viable. This violence was soon followed by bombing, Greek Cypriot deaths and looting of Greek Cypriot-owned shops and houses. Greek and Turkish Cypriots started to flee mixed population villages where they were a minority in search of safety. This was effectively the beginning of the segregation of the two communities. On 7 June 1958, a bomb exploded at the entrance of the Turkish Embassy in Cyprus. Following the bombing, Turkish Cypriots looted Greek Cypriot properties. On 26 June 1984, the Turkish Cypriot leader, Rauf Denktaş, admitted on British channel ITV that the bomb was placed by the Turks themselves in order to create tension. On 9 January 1995, Rauf Denktaş repeated his claim to the famous Turkish newspaper Milliyet in Turkey.
The crisis reached a climax on 12 June 1958, when eight Greeks, out of an armed group of thirty five arrested by soldiers of the Royal Horse Guards on suspicion of preparing an attack on the Turkish quarter of Skylloura, were killed in a suspected attack by Turkish Cypriot locals, near the village of Geunyeli, having been ordered to walk back to their village of Kondemenos.
After the EOKA campaign had begun, the British government successfully began to turn the Cyprus issue from a British colonial problem into a Greek-Turkish issue. British diplomacy exerted backstage influence on the Adnan Menderes government, with the aim of making Turkey active in Cyprus. For the British, the attempt had a twofold objective. The EOKA campaign would be silenced as quickly as possible, and Turkish Cypriots would not side with Greek Cypriots against the British colonial claims over the island, which would thus remain under the British. The Turkish Cypriot leadership visited Menderes to discuss the Cyprus issue. When asked how the Turkish Cypriots should respond to the Greek Cypriot claim of enosis, Menderes replied: "You should go to the British foreign minister and request the status quo be prolonged, Cyprus to remain as a British colony". When the Turkish Cypriots visited the British Foreign Secretary and requested for Cyprus to remain a colony, he replied: "You should not be asking for colonialism at this day and age, you should be asking for Cyprus be returned to Turkey, its former owner".
As Turkish Cypriots began to look to Turkey for protection, Greek Cypriots soon understood that enosis was extremely unlikely. The Greek Cypriot leader, Archbishop Makarios III, now set independence for the island as his objective.
Britain resolved to solve the dispute by creating an independent Cyprus. In 1959, all involved parties signed the Zurich Agreements: Britain, Turkey, Greece, and the Greek and Turkish Cypriot leaders, Makarios and Dr. Fazil Kucuk, respectively. The new constitution drew heavily on the ethnic composition of the island. The President would be a Greek Cypriot, and the Vice-President a Turkish Cypriot with an equal veto. The contribution to the public service would be set at a ratio of 70:30, and the Supreme Court would consist of an equal number of judges from both communities as well as an independent judge who was not Greek, Turkish or British. The Zurich Agreements were supplemented by a number of treaties. The Treaty of Guarantee stated that secession or union with any state was forbidden, and that Greece, Turkey and Britain would be given guarantor status to intervene if that was violated. The Treaty of Alliance allowed for two small Greek and Turkish military contingents to be stationed on the island, and the Treaty of Establishment gave Britain sovereignty over two bases in Akrotiri and Dhekelia.
On 15 August 1960, the Colony of Cyprus became fully independent as the Republic of Cyprus. The new republic remained within the Commonwealth of Nations.
The new constitution brought dissatisfaction to Greek Cypriots, who felt it to be highly unjust for them for historical, demographic and contributional reasons. Although 80% of the island's population were Greek Cypriots and these indigenous people had lived on the island for thousands of years and paid 94% of taxes, the new constitution was giving the 17% of the population that was Turkish Cypriots, who paid 6% of taxes, around 30% of government jobs and 40% of national security jobs.
Within three years tensions between the two communities in administrative affairs began to show. In particular disputes over separate municipalities and taxation created a deadlock in government. A constitutional court ruled in 1963 Makarios had failed to uphold article 173 of the constitution which called for the establishment of separate municipalities for Turkish Cypriots. Makarios subsequently declared his intention to ignore the judgement, resulting in the West German judge resigning from his position. Makarios proposed thirteen amendments to the constitution, which would have had the effect of resolving most of the issues in the Greek Cypriot favour. Under the proposals, the President and Vice-President would lose their veto, the separate municipalities as sought after by the Turkish Cypriots would be abandoned, the need for separate majorities by both communities in passing legislation would be discarded and the civil service contribution would be set at actual population ratios (82:18) instead of the slightly higher figure for Turkish Cypriots.
The intention behind the amendments has long been called into question. The Akritas plan, written in the height of the constitutional dispute by the Greek Cypriot interior minister Polycarpos Georkadjis, called for the removal of undesirable elements of the constitution so as to allow power-sharing to work. The plan envisaged a swift retaliatory attack on Turkish Cypriot strongholds should Turkish Cypriots resort to violence to resist the measures, stating "In the event of a planned or staged Turkish attack, it is imperative to overcome it by force in the shortest possible time, because if we succeed in gaining command of the situation (in one or two days), no outside, intervention would be either justified or possible." Whether Makarios's proposals were part of the Akritas plan is unclear, however it remains that sentiment towards enosis had not completely disappeared with independence. Makarios described independence as "a step on the road to enosis".[31] Preparations for conflict were not entirely absent from Turkish Cypriots either, with right wing elements still believing taksim (partition) the best safeguard against enosis.
Greek Cypriots however believe the amendments were a necessity stemming from a perceived attempt by Turkish Cypriots to frustrate the working of government. Turkish Cypriots saw it as a means to reduce their status within the state from one of co-founder to that of minority, seeing it as a first step towards enosis. The security situation deteriorated rapidly.
Main articles: Bloody Christmas (1963) and Battle of Tillyria
An armed conflict was triggered after December 21, 1963, a period remembered by Turkish Cypriots as Bloody Christmas, when a Greek Cypriot policemen that had been called to help deal with a taxi driver refusing officers already on the scene access to check the identification documents of his customers, took out his gun upon arrival and shot and killed the taxi driver and his partner. Eric Solsten summarised the events as follows: "a Greek Cypriot police patrol, ostensibly checking identification documents, stopped a Turkish Cypriot couple on the edge of the Turkish quarter. A hostile crowd gathered, shots were fired, and two Turkish Cypriots were killed."
In the morning after the shooting, crowds gathered in protest in Northern Nicosia, likely encouraged by the TMT, without incident. On the evening of the 22nd, gunfire broke out, communication lines to the Turkish neighbourhoods were cut, and the Greek Cypriot police occupied the nearby airport. On the 23rd, a ceasefire was negotiated, but did not hold. Fighting, including automatic weapons fire, between Greek and Turkish Cypriots and militias increased in Nicosia and Larnaca. A force of Greek Cypriot irregulars led by Nikos Sampson entered the Nicosia suburb of Omorphita and engaged in heavy firing on armed, as well as by some accounts unarmed, Turkish Cypriots. The Omorphita clash has been described by Turkish Cypriots as a massacre, while this view has generally not been acknowledged by Greek Cypriots.
Further ceasefires were arranged between the two sides, but also failed. By Christmas Eve, the 24th, Britain, Greece, and Turkey had joined talks, with all sides calling for a truce. On Christmas day, Turkish fighter jets overflew Nicosia in a show of support. Finally it was agreed to allow a force of 2,700 British soldiers to help enforce a ceasefire. In the next days, a "buffer zone" was created in Nicosia, and a British officer marked a line on a map with green ink, separating the two sides of the city, which was the beginning of the "Green Line". Fighting continued across the island for the next several weeks.
In total 364 Turkish Cypriots and 174 Greek Cypriots were killed during the violence. 25,000 Turkish Cypriots from 103-109 villages fled and were displaced into enclaves and thousands of Turkish Cypriot houses were ransacked or completely destroyed.
Contemporary newspapers also reported on the forceful exodus of the Turkish Cypriots from their homes. According to The Times in 1964, threats, shootings and attempts of arson were committed against the Turkish Cypriots to force them out of their homes. The Daily Express wrote that "25,000 Turks have already been forced to leave their homes". The Guardian reported a massacre of Turks at Limassol on 16 February 1964.
Turkey had by now readied its fleet and its fighter jets appeared over Nicosia. Turkey was dissuaded from direct involvement by the creation of a United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP) in 1964. Despite the negotiated ceasefire in Nicosia, attacks on the Turkish Cypriot persisted, particularly in Limassol. Concerned about the possibility of a Turkish invasion, Makarios undertook the creation of a Greek Cypriot conscript-based army called the "National Guard". A general from Greece took charge of the army, whilst a further 20,000 well-equipped officers and men were smuggled from Greece into Cyprus. Turkey threatened to intervene once more, but was prevented by a strongly worded letter from the American President Lyndon B. Johnson, anxious to avoid a conflict between NATO allies Greece and Turkey at the height of the Cold War.
Turkish Cypriots had by now established an important bridgehead at Kokkina, provided with arms, volunteers and materials from Turkey and abroad. Seeing this incursion of foreign weapons and troops as a major threat, the Cypriot government invited George Grivas to return from Greece as commander of the Greek troops on the island and launch a major attack on the bridgehead. Turkey retaliated by dispatching its fighter jets to bomb Greek positions, causing Makarios to threaten an attack on every Turkish Cypriot village on the island if the bombings did not cease. The conflict had now drawn in Greece and Turkey, with both countries amassing troops on their Thracian borders. Efforts at mediation by Dean Acheson, a former U.S. Secretary of State, and UN-appointed mediator Galo Plaza had failed, all the while the division of the two communities becoming more apparent. Greek Cypriot forces were estimated at some 30,000, including the National Guard and the large contingent from Greece. Defending the Turkish Cypriot enclaves was a force of approximately 5,000 irregulars, led by a Turkish colonel, but lacking the equipment and organisation of the Greek forces.
The Secretary-General of the United Nations in 1964, U Thant, reported the damage during the conflicts:
UNFICYP carried out a detailed survey of all damage to properties throughout the island during the disturbances; it shows that in 109 villages, most of them Turkish-Cypriot or mixed villages, 527 houses have been destroyed while 2,000 others have suffered damage from looting.
The situation worsened in 1967, when a military junta overthrew the democratically elected government of Greece, and began applying pressure on Makarios to achieve enosis. Makarios, not wishing to become part of a military dictatorship or trigger a Turkish invasion, began to distance himself from the goal of enosis. This caused tensions with the junta in Greece as well as George Grivas in Cyprus. Grivas's control over the National Guard and Greek contingent was seen as a threat to Makarios's position, who now feared a possible coup.[citation needed] The National Guard and Cyprus Police began patrolling the Turkish Cypriot enclaves of Ayios Theodoros and Kophinou, and on November 15 engaged in heavy fighting with the Turkish Cypriots.
By the time of his withdrawal 26 Turkish Cypriots had been killed. Turkey replied with an ultimatum demanding that Grivas be removed from the island, that the troops smuggled from Greece in excess of the limits of the Treaty of Alliance be removed, and that the economic blockades on the Turkish Cypriot enclaves be lifted. Grivas was recalled by the Athens Junta and the 12,000 Greek troops were withdrawn. Makarios now attempted to consolidate his position by reducing the number of National Guard troops, and by creating a paramilitary force loyal to Cypriot independence. In 1968, acknowledging that enosis was now all but impossible, Makarios stated, "A solution by necessity must be sought within the limits of what is feasible which does not always coincide with the limits of what is desirable."
After 1967 tensions between the Greek and Turkish Cypriots subsided. Instead, the main source of tension on the island came from factions within the Greek Cypriot community. Although Makarios had effectively abandoned enosis in favour of an 'attainable solution', many others continued to believe that the only legitimate political aspiration for Greek Cypriots was union with Greece.
On his arrival, Grivas began by establishing a nationalist paramilitary group known as the National Organization of Cypriot Fighters (Ethniki Organosis Kyprion Agoniston B or EOKA-B), drawing comparisons with the EOKA struggle for enosis under the British colonial administration of the 1950s.
The military junta in Athens saw Makarios as an obstacle. Makarios's failure to disband the National Guard, whose officer class was dominated by mainland Greeks, had meant the junta had practical control over the Cypriot military establishment, leaving Makarios isolated and a vulnerable target.
During the first Turkish invasion, Turkish troops invaded Cyprus territory on 20 July 1974, invoking its rights under the Treaty of Guarantee. This expansion of Turkish-occupied zone violated International Law as well as the Charter of the United Nations. Turkish troops managed to capture 3% of the island which was accompanied by the burning of the Turkish Cypriot quarter, as well as the raping and killing of women and children. A temporary cease-fire followed which was mitigated by the UN Security Council. Subsequently, the Greek military Junta collapsed on July 23, 1974, and peace talks commenced in which a democratic government was installed. The Resolution 353 was broken after Turkey attacked a second time and managed to get a hold of 37% of Cyprus territory. The Island of Cyprus was appointed a Buffer Zone by the United Nations, which divided the island into two zones through the 'Green Line' and put an end to the Turkish invasion. Although Turkey announced that the occupied areas of Cyprus to be called the Federated Turkish State in 1975, it is not legitimised on a worldwide political scale. The United Nations called for the international recognition of independence for the Republic of Cyprus in the Security Council Resolution 367.
In the years after the Turkish invasion of northern Cyprus one can observe a history of failed talks between the two parties. The 1983 declaration of the independent Turkish Republic of Cyprus resulted in a rise of inter-communal tensions and made it increasingly hard to find mutual understanding. With Cyprus' interest of a possible EU membership and a new UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan in 1997 new hopes arose for a fresh start. International involvement from sides of the US and UK, wanting a solution to the Cyprus dispute prior to the EU accession led to political pressures for new talks. The believe that an accession without a solution would threaten Greek-Turkish relations and acknowledge the partition of the island would direct the coming negotiations.
Over the course of two years a concrete plan, the Annan plan was formulated. In 2004 the fifth version agreed upon from both sides and with the endorsement of Turkey, US, UK and EU then was presented to the public and was given a referendum in both Cypriot communities to assure the legitimisation of the resolution. The Turkish Cypriots voted with 65% for the plan, however the Greek Cypriots voted with a 76% majority against. The Annan plan contained multiple important topics. Firstly it established a confederation of two separate states called the United Cyprus Republic. Both communities would have autonomous states combined under one unified government. The members of parliament would be chosen according to the percentage in population numbers to ensure a just involvement from both communities. The paper proposed a demilitarisation of the island over the next years. Furthermore it agreed upon a number of 45000 Turkish settlers that could remain on the island. These settlers became a very important issue concerning peace talks. Originally the Turkish government encouraged Turks to settle in Cyprus providing transfer and property, to establish a counterpart to the Greek Cypriot population due to their 1 to 5 minority. With the economic situation many Turkish-Cypriot decided to leave the island, however their departure is made up by incoming Turkish settlers leaving the population ratio between Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots stable. However all these points where criticised and as seen in the vote rejected mainly by the Greek Cypriots. These name the dissolution of the „Republic of Cyprus", economic consequences of a reunion and the remaining Turkish settlers as reason. Many claim that the plan was indeed drawing more from Turkish-Cypriot demands then Greek-Cypriot interests. Taking in consideration that the US wanted to keep Turkey as a strategic partner in future Middle Eastern conflicts.
A week after the failed referendum the Republic of Cyprus joined the EU. In multiple instances the EU tried to promote trade with Northern Cyprus but without internationally recognised ports this spiked a grand debate. Both side endure their intention of negotiations, however without the prospect of any new compromises or agreements the UN is unwilling to start the process again. Since 2004 negotiations took place in numbers but without any results, both sides are strongly holding on to their position without an agreeable solution in sight that would suit both parties.
Taken at the Tea Party Express rally on Boston Common, April 2010.
"GENERIC ANGRY SLOGAN"
"I'm GAY for PALIN!"
On the anniversary of invincibility, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy presented state awards, conferred honorary titles upon military personnel and civilians, and handed over battle flags to military units of the Armed Forces and assault brigades of the Offensive Guard.
The ceremony took place on St. Sophia’s Square in Kyiv.
"Glory to the Heroes! We say these words every time we respond to our national slogan. When "Glory to Ukraine!" sounds, we remember those thanks to whom our country lives. This is how we echo the millennium of our history and the years of our war for independence. This is how we honor the generations of those who fought to make the blue and yellow flag of our people fly in free Kyiv and everywhere in free Ukraine," the President said.
Double meaning - read ALL of the words and get one message... read the white words and get the second!
Project 365 - Image 50/365
Ice-Bat has been looking for a young trainee at Uglyworld University to train in the ways of all things Ugly!
Today he finally made his decision and chose a little trainee power ranger, and has literally taken him under his wing. I made the mistake of calling him a blue power ranger which he took quite some offense at - in his words he's the "Navy Power Ranger".
Ice-Bat has been thinking all morning of a new slogan for his training camp, I offered to help him think of one but he semi-jokingly told me, "It's ok, I'll think of it, after all I do have 'the power' now".
I look forward to seeing what he comes up with.
From the Uglydoll blog at adventuresinuglyworld.blogspot.com/
www.maryam-rajavi.com/fr/index.php?option=com_content&...
Le vacarme des mollahs dans leur course aux armes atomiques, le sifflement strident de leurs bombes qui déchiquettent l’Irak et les hurlements de peur et de terreur qu’ils sèment dans le pays, ne sont pas la voix de l’Iran.
La voix de l’Iran retentit à travers les slogans des jeunes Moudjahidine et militants qui dans le soulèvement contre le rationnement de l’essence lancent « Mort au dictateur ! ».
La voix de l’Iran, ce sont les cris des femmes courageuses, le visage couvert de sang, qui dans le face à face avec les gardiens de la révolution ces derniers mois, ont bouleversé le monde.
La voix de l’Iran, c’est la voix d’Elham, cette fillette de 10 ans au rassemblement des enseignants protestataires à Téhéran, qui parle de son père en prison et fait pleurer des milliers d’enseignants.
Le cri de l’Iran, c’est le cri des ouvriers qui scandaient le 1er mai « On ne veut pas du nucléaire, on veut de quoi vivre et du travail», et « un avenir, c’est notre droit inaliénable ».
La voix de l’Iran, ce sont les battements des cœurs oppressés de 71 adolescents condamnés à mort.
La voix de l’Iran, ce sont les lamentations des mères kurdes et baloutches et des femmes arabes du Khouzistan qui pleurent la mort de leurs fils pendus ces derniers mois dans les rues de Sanandaj, Zahedan et Ahwaz.
La voix de l’Iran, ce sont les slogans des étudiants de Polytechnique et des universités de tout le pays qui crient « Mort au dictateur ! ».
La voix de l’Iran, ce sont les hurlements de douleur dans les salles de torture des mollahs. « Je suis encore vivant, ma voix ne s’est pas éteinte, je brise le silence d’un millier dans la section 209. »
La voix de l’Iran c’est le grondement des Moudjahidine de la liberté, qui appellent depuis la Cité d’Achraf, les Iraniens à se lever pour la liberté.
Et nous aujourd’hui, d’une seule voix avec les Iraniens insurgés, nous crions qu’au lieu du régime des mollahs, il faut instaurer la liberté et la souveraineté populaire.
Oui, c’est ça la voix de l’Iran.
Le soulèvement général des 26 et 27 juin déclenché par la crise de l’essence, montre le véritable visage d’une société exaspérée au bord de l’explosion. Ce soulèvement est le témoignage le plus objectif et le plus clair des revendications brûlantes des Iraniens. Ils veulent renverser le régime des mollahs.
Les cris de « Mort à Ahmadinejad » qui ont immédiatement retenti dans les rues de Téhéran, les charges courageuses des insurgés contre les centres du pouvoir et la panique qui s’est emparée du régime, tout montrait que cela dépassait de loin une crise économique. Il s’agit d’une crise qui marque la phase terminale du régime et sa destruction.
C’est en instaurant un couvre-feu, en arrêtant des centaines de personnes et en faisant des morts et des blessés parmi les jeunes, que le régime a répondu. Le guide suprême des mollahs a donné l’ordre d’agir fermement, en faisant des exemples. Mais ce qui est exemplaire, c’est la défaite cuisante que le soulèvement populaire vient d’infliger aux mollahs et à leurs alliés.
En une heure, toute la démagogie de ces deux dernières années où ils disaient vouloir partager les revenus pétroliers avec le peuple, est partie en fumée.
Tous les slogans du pouvoir sur le programme atomique, comme quoi « l’énergie nucléaire est notre droit inaliénable », ont disparu dans les flammes du soulèvement.
Toute la propagande des apologistes de la complaisance sur la stabilité et la puissance des mollahs, s’est évanouie. Et la marque de terroriste qu’ils collent à la résistance pour la liberté, a brûlé dans le feu de l’insurrection.
Et maintenant c’est au tour du peuple iranien de demander : avec toutes ces annonces sur les progrès scientifiques pour justifier le programme nucléaire contraire aux intérêts de la nation, comment se fait-il qu’en trente ans vous n’ayez même pas été capables de construire une raffinerie pour produire de l’essence ? Pourquoi tout cet argent que vous avez dilapidé pour fabriquer une bombe atomique, vous ne l’avez pas utilisé pour raffiner de l’essence ? Pourquoi en imposant ce rationnement de l’essence, avez-vous détruit en une nuit la source de revenus d’une immense partie de la population ? Pourquoi tout à coup, avez-vous réduit au chômage et à la misère des millions de personnes ?
Ils n’ont pas de réponse, parce qu’ils sont au bout du chemin. Ils ne savent rien faire d’autre que réprimer et exporter le terrorisme et l’intégrisme. Ils sont dans une impasse.
C’est pourquoi ces deux dernières années, tout ce que les Etats partisans de la complaisance ont misé ou prétendu sur le régime des mollahs, s’est avéré faux.
Ils ont dit qu’en encourageant les mollahs, ils changeraient leur comportement. Or au lieu de changer, les mollahs ont enfoncé l’Irak dans un bain de sang, ont entraîné le Liban dans le chaos, ont divisé en deux la Palestine et ont ramené le terrorisme et l’effusion de sang en Afghanistan.
Ces Etats ont dit qu’avec les marchandages et les négociations, ils obtiendraient l’accord des mollahs pour suspendre leur programme atomique. Or ces derniers ont développé leurs activités pour fabriquer des armes nucléaires et ont ignoré trois résolutions du Conseil de Sécurité de l’ONU.
Ils prétendaient qu’un embargo pousserait les Iraniens à soutenir le régime, ils peuvent ouvrir les yeux maintenant et voir ce soulèvement général. Et cela se passe alors que l’étiquette de terroriste collée à la résistance permet aux mollahs de maîtriser les effets des sanctions. Imaginez alors ce qui se passera, le jour où cette étiquette de terrorisme disparaîtra !
Oui, le problème c’est que toutes les politiques face à la crise iranienne ont abouti à un échec. Pour l’Iran, la région et l’Irak, il n’y a qu’une solution et c’est un changement démocratique réalisé par le peuple iranien et sa résistance.
Le choix des Iraniens, c’est la liberté et la démocratie. C’est pour elles que Satarkhan, notre héro national, s’est battu en 1908. C’était la grande espérance de Mossadegh dans les années 1950. Et c’est le but de la résistance érigée par Massoud Radjavi. Nous ne baisserons pas les bras pas tant que nous ne l’aurons pas atteint.
Il y a deux jours, l’Union européenne, comme on pouvait le prévoir, après sept mois de fraude et d’intrigues, a finalement piétiné le verdict de la Cour de Justice Européenne et dans une mesure illégale, a maintenu le nom des Moudjahidine sur la liste en servant les intérêts du parrain du terrorisme.
À cause de la clarté du verdict supprimant le nom de l’OMPI de cette liste, le Conseil des Ministres a été incapable d’en publier une pendant 13 mois. Il devait choisir entre deux voies : soit supprimer l’OMPI de la liste et brouiller ses relations avec le régime des mollahs, soit être frappé de honte et de discrédit pour avoir violé un arrêt de justice et coopéré avec le régime des mollahs.
Il a finalement choisi le scandale. Mais il doit savoir que la complicité avec les bourreaux des enfants et des jeunes en Iran, la collaboration avec les responsables du massacre de la population en Irak et l’ennemi de la paix dans la région et l’assistance fournie aux banquiers du terrorisme dans le monde, est une tache honteuse qui souillera à jamais l’histoire de l’Europe.
J’appelle toutes les femmes et tous les hommes libres d’Europe, quelle que soit leur fonction, à prendre leur distance avec cette tache honteuse et à obliger le Conseil des Ministres de l’Union européenne à se plier au verdict et à la loi. La Résistance iranienne utilisera tous les moyens politiques et juridiques légitimes, pour faire appliquer ce verdict et pour faire supprimer le nom de l’OMPI de la liste noire.
Au lendemain de ce verdict, le Conseil des Ministres européen aurait pu faire appel, mais il a préféré désobéir à la décision de justice. Puis il a fraudé pour dissimuler son infraction.
Le 30 janvier, le Conseil des Ministres européen a annoncé son intention de maintenir cette inscription. En même temps, il a demandé à la Résistance iranienne de présenter les raisons pour lesquelles elle rejette cette accusation, en lui donnant un mois de délai. La décision de maintenir l’OMPI sur la liste est une infraction et la demande de documents une fraude évidente.
Car ils avaient déjà pris la décision de contourner le verdict de la cour de justice. Dans les documents qu’ils ont remis récemment aux avocats, il est dit que le 18 décembre, c'est-à-dire six jours à peine après le verdict, ils ont abordé dans une réunion les « étapes nécessaires pour maintenir le nom de l’OMPI dans la liste ».
C’est ce que ces messieurs du Conseil des Ministres appellent la démocratie !
Au lieu d’examiner et de faire des recherches, ils font des réunions pour savoir par quelle tactique frauduleuse ils peuvent maintenir l’OMPI sur la liste noire.
Tandis que le Conseil des Ministres, dans des lettres successives, a prétendu que la décision finale n’avait pas encore été prise, Tony Blair, l’ancien Premier ministre britannique, a reconnu que la décision avait été adoptée au mois de janvier. C’est-à-dire avant que la Résistance, conformément au délai d’un mois, ne remette ses documents. Le bureau de la Chancelière allemande a dévoilé une autre contradiction, en disant que la décision avait été prise au mois de février.
Par conséquent ce mois de délai est une véritable supercherie.
Ils ont prétendu que le verdict ne portait que sur la procédure. Ils ont prétendu que le verdict n’annulait que la décision de 2005 de l’Union européenne et ne concernait pas celle de l’année suivante.
Mais comme l’a montré Lord Slynn dans son précieux avis juridique, c’est là une allégation trompeuse. Le Conseil a accepté l’annulation de sa décision de 2005. De même, il a reconnu au tribunal que conformément à un article du traité européen, toute autre décision de substitution devait être annulée.
Par conséquent le Conseil des Ministres a enfreint ouvertement ses obligations vis-à-vis du traité européen. Ce qui s’est passé, c’est une violation des droits fondamentaux, et cela va bien au-delà de la procédure et de la manière dont sont prises les décisions. Ce sont donc les droits du peuple iranien qui ont été violés.
Oui, toute la dispute porte sur les droits du peuple iranien et avec cette inscription sur la liste noire, ils ont été livrés sur un plateau au régime des mollahs. Mais sachez que nous et notre peuple, nous arracherons ces droits usurpés des griffes des mollahs
Des documents douteux ;
Le Conseil des Ministres européen a été obligé à la suite des demandes répétées des avocats, de leur remettre ses documents sur les accusations de terrorisme.
Le Conseil a certainement dépensé beaucoup de temps et d’énergie pour rassembler ces documents. Mais la montagne a fini par accoucher d’une souris, et au lieu de documents juridiques valables, il a transmis une poignée de papiers sans valeur.
Une partie de ces papiers n’a pas de sources et on ne sait pas d’où ils sortent. D’autres ne sont pas datés. Certains ne portent même pas le nom des Moudjahidine du peuple et n’ont aucun rapport avec l’OMPI. D’autres enfin ont été pris sur des sites Internet douteux.
Est-ce qu’il s’agit de documents juridiques ou de futilités qui déshonorent l’Union européenne et nous font perdre du temps ? Et n’aurait-il pas été préférable qu’ils aient le courage de dire qu’ils n’avaient rien ?
Ecoutez : Un de ces documents dit que puisque le ministre de l’Intérieur britannique avait mis le mouvement de la résistance dans la liste du terrorisme en 2001, il s’agissait donc de terroristes. Un proverbe persan dit : Quand on demande au renard de produire un témoin, il désigne sa queue ! Ce qui est intéressant, c’est que ce ministre a souligné à deux reprises l’an passé qu’il avait mis l’OMPI dans la liste à la demande des mollahs.
Dans un autre document, on prétend que cette résistance ne bénéficie d’aucun soutien en Iran. Bien ! Quel rapport avec l’accusation de terrorisme ? D’ailleurs, cela montre que la complaisance avec les mollahs, n’a pas seulement privé ces messieurs de lucidité et de raison, elle les a aussi privés de la vue. Alors messieurs, ouvrez les yeux et regardez la base populaire de cette résistance. Vous ne voyez donc pas quelle tempête les jeunes Moudjahidine et militants ont soulevée ces jours-ci.
Ecoutez encore : un autre document intéressant sur le prétendu terrorisme de cette résistance. On peut y lire : il y a huit ans, lors d’un débat au parlement britannique, le représentant du gouvernement a rejeté les déclarations de la Résistance iranienne en disant que le résultat de l’élection présidentielle de Khatami renforçait l’optimisme sur le développement des futures relations entre l’Iran et la Grande-Bretagne.
Quel rapport il y a-t-il entre votre optimisme sur le mollah Khatami, l’avancée des dites réformes en Iran, et coller l’étiquette de terrorisme à cette résistance ? D’ailleurs, maintenant qu’à la place des réformes, la bande la plus extrémiste du régime est arrivée au pouvoir et met le monde à feu et à sang, jugez par vous-mêmes : Etait-ce de l’optimisme ou de la stupidité ?
Et voici encore un autre document qui dit : Le mouvement de la résistance s’est exilé en 1981 et il est parti en Irak. Là où actuellement se trouve une armée de plusieurs milliers de combattants et où ils sont soutenus par le régime irakien.
Mais enfin Messieurs ! Cela fait environ quatre ans que l’ancien régime irakien a été renversé et qu’il n’existe plus ! Vous ne voyez donc pas que les Moudjahidine du peuple ne sont plus armés depuis quatre ans ?
«Balivernes ! Etes-vous ivres, auriez-vous perdu la tête ou faites-vous exprès?»
Mais il y a encore un document très significatif : Le Conseil des Ministres brandit un article publié il y a dix ans dans la presse internationale comme un de ses documents. On peut y lire que cette résistance « est toujours la plus forte opposition à un régime qui est un hors-la-loi international… »
Alors c’est clair, votre crime, c’est d’être l’opposition la plus forte à un régime hors-la-loi.
Mais voilà un autre crime, selon un document du Conseil des Ministres: « Les dirigeants du Conseil national de la Résistance disent que lorsque le moment opportun sera venu, cette résistance se lèvera en soutien au soulèvement général contre le gouvernement intégriste. Ils disent : Nous avons l’intention de coordonner cette résistance avec la montée des troubles sociaux pour balayer les mollahs. »
Alors votre crime, c’est aussi d’attiser les protestations et les soulèvements de votre peuple et d’y apporter votre soutien.
Messieurs, il faut vous dire que nous ne cesserons jamais de lutter pour la liberté. Jamais nous ne cesserons. Jamais nous ne cesserons d’attiser les protestations des étudiants, des ouvriers, des enseignant et de les soutenir. C’est un combat que nous mènerons jusqu’à la victoire.
Oui, selon ce document, le plan de cette résistance pour écarter les mollahs revient à s’appuyer sur un soulèvement populaire.
Vous voyez ? D’un coté ils prétendent que la résistance est terroriste, puisqu’elle n’a pas de base populaire. Et d’un autre ils prétendent qu’elle est terroriste puisqu’elle s’appuie sur un soulèvement populaire.
Alors que faut-il croire ?
Ni l’un ni l’autre. Ce qu’il faut croire, c’est que les grandes puissances occidentales ont réprimé la solution dont elles disent qu’elle s’appuie sur un soulèvement populaire. Ainsi donc ce document du Conseil des Ministres est un document sur le crime des partisans de la complaisance.
Oui, Messieurs, vous êtes coupables. Vous êtes coupables d’avoir taxé de terrorisme la résistance contre le fascisme religieux. Vous êtes coupables de faire croire au monde qu’il n’y a pas de solution à la crise iranienne. Et il ne fait aucun doute que vous serez déshonorés devant les Nations européennes.
Je suis heureuse que vous disiez que les papiers caducs, contradictoires et trompeurs qui violent la loi, n’ont aucune légitimité dans l’Europe d’aujourd’hui.
Depuis l’annonce du verdict de la Cour européenne de Justice, plus de mille parlementaires de divers pays d’Europe ont condamné le refus du Conseil des Ministres d’appliquer le verdict. Un grand nombre d’organes parlementaires ont protesté à travers des déclarations, des résolutions et des lettres officielles, notamment dans les parlements britannique, français, allemand, italien, hollandais, danois, polonais et tchèque, contre la position du Conseil des Ministres.
C’est là que nous devons répéter la question du Dr. Vidal Quadras, vice-président du Parlement européen : Il y a-t-il quelqu’un qui pense que mille parlementaires de pays démocratiques se trompent tous ensemble?
Nous aussi nous avons des questions : lorsque vous ignorez les résolutions et les décrets de lois des plus hauts organes parlementaires en Europe et lorsque vous piétinez un arrêt de justice, que reste-t-il de la démocratie ?
Quand vous prenez vos décisions unilatéralement et en secret, que reste-t-il de la démocratie ?
Mais est-ce que la démocratie ce n’est pas répondre de ses actes, ce n’est pas écouter des avis différents, ce n’est pas respecter l’état de droit et la transparence?
Alors ce centre secret au cœur de l’Union européenne qui décide sur les accusations de terrorisme, qu’est-ce que c’est ? Un palais de verre noir mystérieux du nom de Clearing House, dont on ne connaît ni l’emplacement, ni les membres, ni le calendrier.
Est-ce qu’il s’agit d’un organe européen conforme aux normes démocratiques ou d’une arrière-salle obscure? Mais laissez-nous dire aux occupants de cette arrière-salle obscure que même s’ils jettent les droits du peuple iranien dans la gueule d’un monstre, nous irons les en retirer.
Quand le 17 juin 2003, dans le but de détruire la résistance, le gouvernement de M. Chirac a lancé contre les bureaux du Conseil national de la Résistance iranienne une véritable armada, il a étendu les frontières de la complaisance de manière incroyable en participant directement à la répression de la population iranienne. Il s’est abaissé à être l’exécutant de la dictature religieuse.
Ils ont été si loin dans cette voie qu’ils ont ouvert les portes aux agents des services secrets des mollahs, pour qu’ici même à Paris, il commettent des crimes à l’arme blanche et préparent le terrain à des attentats terroristes.
À la recherche d’accords économiques, les gouvernements européens, et à leur tête Paris, prétendaient vouloir modérer le régime des mollahs. Mais quel en a été le résultat ?
Au lieu de se modérer, les mollahs ont mis Ahmadinejad au pouvoir et se sont consacrés à la bombe atomique et à dévorer l’Irak. Le phénomène Ahmadinejad, c’est le résultat de l’alliance du fascisme religieux et de la politique de complaisance.
Mais en vérité, ce que les grandes puissances occidentales n’ont toujours pas pris en compte, c’est que la Résistance iranienne constitue la clé majeure et la plus efficace des événements en Iran et dans cette région. Il y a 27 ans, Khomeiny avait dit que son principal ennemi n’était ni l’Amérique ni l’URSS, mais les Moudjahidine du peuple. Aujourd’hui aussi, Khamenei son disciple, montre que les porte-avions américains dans le Golfe persique ne représentent pas un vrai danger pour son pouvoir, ni les pressions internationales, mais que ce sont bien les Moudjahidine du peuple, la Cité d’Achraf et la Résistance iranienne, c’est-à-dire ceux qui inspirent les soulèvements et les protestations explosives de la société iranienne, qui représentent un danger pour l’existence de son régime.
C’est un danger qui fait trembler les mollahs nuit et jour. C’est contre cela qu’ils veulent se doter de la bombe atomique pour maintenir leur pouvoir vacillant. Mais la tornade de liberté que le peuple iranien soulèvera, particulièrement les femmes et les jeunes, balaiera tout leur appareil de répression cruelle.
Au début de ce mois, le ministère britannique des Affaires étrangères a envoyé une réponse à la plainte déposée par des parlementaires amis de la Résistance contre l’étiquette de terrorisme. Il souligne que les ministres et les autorités du régime des mollahs ont discuté avec leurs homologues en Angleterre et dans l’Union européenne à d’innombrables reprises des Moudjahidine du peuple et de la résistance.
Oui, à d’innombrables reprises et lors d’innombrables marchandages sur le dos de la résistance.
Le ministère britannique des Affaires étrangères dit qu’il a mené ces discussions avec le régime des mollahs pendant des années et qu’il voulait échanger des informations sur les activités de l’OMPI en Grande-Bretagne, en Iran et en Irak avec le régime iranien.
Oui, échanger des informations et fomenter des complots contre le mouvement de la résistance.
Le ministère des Affaires étrangères anglais a averti dans sa lettre que toute action visant à supprimer l’OMPI de la liste entraînerait la déstabilisation du régime. Oui, c’est le cœur du problème : supprimer l’OMPI de la liste ferait trembler les fondements des mollahs car leur destinée est entre les mains de cette résistance.
Le ministère des Affaires étrangères anglais dans cette lettre révèle pour la première fois que le régime lui avait demandé six mois avant la guerre contre l’Irak quels seraient les effets d’une éventuelle intervention militaire en Irak sur la Résistance iranienne. Les autorités anglaises avaient donné l’assurance qu’elles prendraient au sérieux le cas de la Résistance iranienne en Irak.
Oui, elles allaient le prendre au sérieux en bombardant les centres de la Résistance. Elles ont bombardé la Cité d’Achraf 120 fois en une seule nuit.
La force qui garantit la solution pour cette région a été bombardée et désarmée. Quelle en a été la conséquence ? Les mollahs et les gardiens de la révolution se sont déversés par milliers en Irak et ont plongé cette nation opprimée et blessée dans un tourbillon de sang. Cette erreur fatale des grandes puissances occidentales a enchaîné la Résistance iranienne.
Par conséquent, Messieurs, nous vous appelons à changer cette politique désastreuse, à quitter le camp des mollahs et à accepter le verdict de la Cour européenne de justice. C’est dans votre intérêt, et ce sera un pas déterminant pour mettre fin à la politique de complaisance.
Mais en ce qui concerne cette résistance, ses amis et ses partisans, c’est une lutte promise à une victoire certaine. La volonté d’airain, le sacrifice, la foi et les efforts incessants des membres de cette Résistance et du peuple iranien, casseront l’accusation de terrorisme et avanceront jusqu’à la victoire finale. Cela ne fait aucun doute.
La politique française
Nous appelons aussi la France à mettre fin à la politique qui sous le mandat de M. Chirac avait fait de ce pays le principal allié du fascisme religieux. Le dossier du 17 juin est l’héritage le plus infâme du gouvernement précédent. Ce dossier sert littéralement à maintenir sous contrôle le mouvement de la Résistance iranienne au profit des mollahs. Il est maintenu ouvert pour cette raison.
Ce dossier est sans fondement d’un point de vue juridique et c’est un complot d’un point de vue politique. Dans l’histoire juridique de la France, c’est une affaire sans précédent depuis la seconde guerre mondiale. Ils sont tellement à court, qu’ils ont dû engager des agents des services secrets des mollahs pour servir de témoins.
Ce dossier qui est depuis le début dans une impasse, particulièrement depuis le verdict historique de la Cour européenne de justice, s’est aussi effondré sur le fond.
Lors des élections présidentielles en France, le nouveau président de la République a maintes fois parlé d’une France nouvelle et a promis le changement. Mais je dois rappeler qu’en ce qui concerne l’Iran, ce changement n’aura d’autre signification que de mettre fin à la politique de complaisance qui s’est avérée un échec. La page noire que le dossier du 17 juin a ouvert dans les relations entre la France et le peuple iranien, doit être tournée. C’est le critère le plus important du changement. Ainsi donc, le peuple iranien jugera la nouvelle politique de la France à l’aune de ce qu’elle fera dans la pratique.
Oui, écoutez les Français qui ont, durant toutes ces années, porté au plus haut la solidarité et le soutien à cette résistance. Vive les Français au grand cœur qui se sont élevés contre la politique de complaisance. Permettez-moi ici de leur dire toute ma gratitude :
(en français dans le texte)
« Mesdames et Messieurs, Chers Amis,
Je salue chacun d’entre vous, votre présence ici démontre la solidarité et l’amitié profonde entre le peuple français et le peuple iranien. En Iran, les femmes, les étudiants, les ouvriers et les autres couches en colère de la société qui se sont soulevés plusieurs fois ces derniers mois contre le régime des mollahs, se sentent soutenus en vous voyant.
La Cité d’Achraf en Irak, où se trouvent les Moudjahidine du peuple qui résistent à une vague de terreur de l’intégrisme des mollahs se sent soutenue en vous voyant. Pour eux vous incarnez les valeurs essentielles de l’Europe, comme la démocratie, la justice et l’état de droit. Et dans les Français, ils voient la liberté, l’égalité et la fraternité et la France des droits de l’homme. Une France qui n’est pas aux cotés du fascisme religieux. Une France qui ne participe pas à la répression de l’opposition. Une France qui respecte l’aspiration des Iraniens à la liberté, l’état de droit, la laïcité et l’égalité.
Les événements de ces quatre dernières années montrent que la solidarité précieuse des Français a joué un grand rôle face à la politique de complaisance. Face à la rafle du 17 juin 2003, vous avez soutenu la résistance. Vous avez défendu ce mouvement face à la campagne de diabolisation. Vous avez condamné la fabrication de dossier et la manipulation de la justice. Et vous vous êtes élevés courageusement face à l’accusation honteuse de terrorisme et face au refus d’appliquer le jugement de la Cour européenne.
Je suis honorée de votre amitié, et votre solidarité est désormais écrite en lettres d’or dans l’histoire de l’Iran.»
L’ingérence des mollahs en Irak
Mes chers compatriotes,
La vie pleine de souffrances du peuple irakien, rend nécessaire l’importance d’une solution juste et réelle. Chaque jour en Irak, une centaine de personnes au moins roulent dans leur sang. A la fin de chaque journée, 400 enfants deviennent orphelins. Chaque jour, les femmes et les filles sans abris deviennent la cible d’agressions et de harcèlements, et chaque jour des milliers d’Irakiens innocents se retrouvent sans abri.
Ce terrible massacre est planifié à Téhéran dans un état-major supervisé par le guide suprême des mollahs, Khamenei. Parce que si ce régime ne réussit pas à appliquer son plan funeste pour s’emparer de l’Irak, il sera incapable d’assurer sa survie à Téhéran.
Il y a quatre ans, j’avais averti que le danger de l’ingérence du régime iranien en Irak était cent fois plus dangereux que son projet atomique. Au cours des quatre dernières années, ce régime a mis en œuvre sa politique d’occupation rampante de l’Irak. Il est devenu désormais l’occupant principal.
Massoud Radjavi dans son message d’il y a deux semaines au Congrès de la solidarité pour la paix et la liberté du peuple irakien a souligné : « le problème principal en Irak, c’est l’affrontement et la guerre entre deux alternatives sur le sol irakien dans cette conjoncture particulière. L’alternative des mollahs au pouvoir en Iran face à l’alternative irakienne. L’alternative du régime fasciste des mollahs avec tous ses réseaux, ses agents et ceux qui les soutiennent, face à l’alternative anti-fasciste irakienne avec tous ses mouvements, ses groupes, ses partis,ses personnalités démocratiques et patriotiques et ceux qui les soutiennent sur la scène arabe et internationale. »
C’est sur cette base que 5,2 millions d’Irakiens ont affirmé dans une déclaration que la solution est « d’évincer d’Irak le régime iranien et de reconnaître le statut des Moudjahidine du peuple qui sont le contrepoids à l’ingérence du pouvoir iranien. »
Aujourd’hui le régime de Téhéran, voit dans les Moudjahidine du peuple un tel barrage à son ingérence en Irak que, contrairement à toutes les conventions et lois internationales, il ne supporte même pas leur présence non armée et toutes ses restrictions dans ce pays. Comme le dit Massoud Radjavi, c’est là que se trouve le talon d’Achille du monstre de l’intégrisme. Le critère du changement démocratique en Iran est entre les mains de la Résistance du peuple iranien.
Il y a deux semaines dans un rassemblement de 10.000 Irakiens, une déclaration signée par 450.000 habitants de la province de Diyala dont 21 partis, associations et groupes divers, annonçait que toutes les forces nationales et démocratiques de la région de Diyala, de toutes les couches sociales, tribus et religions, se tenaient aux cotés des Moudjahidine de la cité d’Achraf. Et toute agression, accusation et mensonge contre l’OMPI serait considéré comme contraire aux intérêts du peuple irakien. Je rends hommage du fond du cœur aux habitants de la province de Diyala et au noble peuple d’Irak.
Permettez-moi ici d’aborder un sujet sur la tragédie des enfants en Irak. Il y a une dizaine de jours, les chaînes internationales ont montré des images terribles sur un orphelinat là-bas, des enfants innocents dont les parents avaient été assassinés. Ces enfants avaient été torturés, affamés et même violés. Les revenus pétroliers de l’Irak sont pillés par milliards par les mollahs au pouvoir en Iran, tandis que les orphelins irakiens connaissent ces conditions de vie.
Par conséquent, nous proposons aux Nations Unies de prendre en charge un nombre d’orphelins irakiens en mettant à leur disposition tous les moyens que nous possédons. Je propose en particulier que la Résistance iranienne, sous le contrôle de l’UNICEF et conformément à ses critères, prenne en charge mille enfants irakiens et toutes leurs dépenses à la Cité d’Achraf. C’est une proposition purement humanitaire loin de toute considération politique et de propagande. Nous donnerons aussi cette proposition à l’ambassade d’Irak à Paris et nous espérons que le gouvernement actuel irakien donnera son accord à ce plan humanitaire pour mille enfants innocents et que sur ce sujet il ne fera pas cas de l’opposition du régime des mollahs.
Les Moudjahidine du peuple d’Iran
Mes chers compatriotes,
Durant l’offensive des intégristes qui veulent répandre partout la terreur avec une cruauté sans précédent, la ténacité de cette résistance et des Moudjahidine du peuple ouvre des horizons brillants et ravive la flamme de l’espoir dans le cœur d’une société opprimée.
A tel point que les mollahs ont été obligés de fabriquer des séries télévisées pour contrer la vague de sympathie qui pousse les jeunes vers la résistance. Ils n’ont pas le courage d’avouer que toutes ces mises en scène et ces allégations prétendant la fin de la résistance, ont échoué. Ils ont peur de dire que tous ces dossiers fabriqués et ces accusations contre la résistance sont tombés à l’eau. Ils se réfugient alors dans de la propagande hystérique. Mais sachez que si vous consacrez 24 heures sur 24 vos programmes radio télévisés et votre presse contre cette résistance, vous ne pourrez empêcher le renversement de votre théocratie.
Tout le monde sait qu’il y a quatre ans, les coups politiques et militaires les plus durs comparables à un tsunami ont frappé ce mouvement : du désarmement, aux bombardements jusqu’a la rafle du 17 juin. Des coups si durs que si un dixième d’entre eux avait frappé le régime des mollahs, il ne fait aucun doute qu’il aurait renoncé à tout. Mais ce mouvement est sorti de cette crise plus fort, la tête haute et s’est transformé en une menace encore plus grande pour le régime des mollahs.
Alors, quel est le secret de cette résistance et des Moudjahidine ? Quelle est la source de cette détermination ? Comment plusieurs fois tel un phoenix ont-t-ils ressuscité de leurs douleurs et de leurs cendres ? Et dans une situation où les partis politiques les plus puissants dans le monde sont en proie aux déchirements et aux divisions, comment préservent-ils leur unité et renforcent-ils leur développement ?
En plus du sacrifice et de la sincérité, ce secret repose dans l’existence d’une direction compétente et d’une démocratie avancée dans les relations internes, basée sur le libre choix conscient de chacun de ses membres.
Le libre choix, c’est la pierre angulaire de l’amitié profonde et de l’unité interne, de la créativité, du sens des responsabilités et de la qualité humaine dans ce mouvement. C’est pour cette raison que ce mouvement est l’annonciateur de la liberté de choix pour le peuple iranien. Dès le premier jour, Massoud Radjavi avait dit que les Moudjahidine sont là pour se sacrifier afin que le peuple iranien puisse bénéficier de la liberté de choix.
Le secret, c’est aussi qu’ils croient en la victoire au plus profond d’eux-mêmes. Mais ils n’en tirent pas leur motivation et n’ont pas passé leur existence sur des chemins tout tracés sinon ils n’auraient jamais étés capables de résister face au monstre de l’intégrisme.
Des êtres débordant d’espoirs, des êtres tenaces et patients, qui résistent aux tempêtes, qui ont la certitude que le soleil brille au-delà des nuages sombres, et qui ont atteint une étape étonnante des capacités humaines.
Ils rendent possible l’impossible avec une formidable endurance, en acceptant des engagements surprenants et avec un amour sans faille.
Comme le disait Dolores Ibárruri, la Pasionaria : « Racontez à vos enfants à propos de ceux qui ont traversé les océans, les montagnes et les frontières protégées par des baïonnettes, dites-leur que même quand ils étaient menacés par des meutes de chiens qui cherchaient à les dévorer, ils ont renoncé à tout : à leur amour, à leur pays, à leur foyer, à leur richesse, à leur père, à leur mère, à leur conjoint, à leurs frères et leurs sœurs et à leurs enfants … pour nous dire qu’ils sont là pour défendre notre idéal, l’idéal progressiste de toute l’humanité. »
Oui, il y a un idéal, issu des demandes les plus profondes et les plus essentielles du peuple iranien pour lesquelles 120.000 de ses enfants les plus nobles et des symboles comme Neda et Sedigheh, ont donné leur vie. Le souvenir de ces héros restera à jamais dans nos cœurs.
L’Iran de demain
Mes chers compatriotes,
Que les partisans de la complaisance le veuillent ou non, le temps des mollahs est révolu. Nous allons tourner la page de l’oppression et de la souffrance.
- Nous allons bâtir un nouvel Iran, une société libre, un pays de progrès.
- Nous laisserons derrière nous l’époque des exécutions et de la torture.
- Nous abolirons la peine de mort.
- Nous débarrasserons le pays de ces tribunaux intégristes et de ces châtiments moyenâgeux.
- Nous mettrons fin à l’époque de l’inquisition, du code vestimentaire obligatoire et de l’ingérence dans la vie privée.
- Nous mettrons fin à l’époque de l’oppression et de la répression tragique des femmes en Iran. Dans tous les domaines, les femmes auront les mêmes droits et libertés que les hommes, les femmes participeront à part égale à la direction politique de la société.
- L’époque de l’humiliation des jeunes, l’époque du gaspillage de l’énergie et de la créativité sont révolues. L’Iran libre sera un pays où les jeunes participeront activement à l’édification de leur propre avenir.
- Nous instaurerons un pouvoir basé sur la séparation de la religion et de l’Etat pour que les adeptes des diverses religions et croyances puissent vivre de manière égale cote à cote.
- Un peuple avec autant de talents ne doit plus vivre dans la misère, dans la faim et le chômage.
- Il faudra mettre en place des conditions pour l’investissement et une concurrence économique saine et mettre fin au système de rente et de pillage.
- Il faudra reconstruire l’agriculture et l’industrie dévastées du pays, remplacer le système d’enseignement, d’hygiène et de santé par un système moderne et adapté et faire de notre pays un foyer de développement durable comme il le mérite.
- Un développement où la liberté, la démocratie, et la justice sociale brilleront.
« Le ciel bleu, la nuit clair,
Par la fenêtre, une lumière.
Nous inviterons la lune
à briller sur les coquelicots
et à chanter sur les plaines.
J’invite la lune à briller, briller, briller. »
Oui, nous ferons disparaître la souffrance de l’oppression
Nous bâtirons un nouvel Iran
Un pays fondé sur la liberté
Un pays fondé sur la tolérance …
Un pays fondé sur l’égalité
Alors, amis sincères de la Résistance,
Vous avez tout à votre disposition pour vaincre.
Vous qui avez battu les intégristes dans votre propre pays,
Vous qui avez rassemblé toutes les nationalités dans la république sur la base de la séparation de la religion et de l’Etat,
Vous qui bénéficiez du soutien et de l’affection d’un peuple,
Vous qui avez un idéal de droit et de légitimité devant vous,
Vous qui bénéficiez du grand capital d’un mouvement doté de quatre décennies de luttes incessantes et d’une organisation unie et puissante,
Et vous qui avez Massoud pour dirigeant,
Oui, vous avez tout pour la victoire
Oui, vous avez tout pour la victoire
Alors levez-vous !
Prenez le drapeau de Sattar et de Mossadegh
De Hanifnejad, de Mohsen et de Badizadegan,
de Djazani et d’Ahmadzadeh, de Pouyan et de Paknejad
d’Achraf et de Khiabani, faites les revivre en vous !
Rallumez partout les flammes de la lutte !
Vous serez vainqueurs !
Vous serez vainqueurs !
Oui, vous serez vainqueurs !