Cyprus-Forum.com

[Piratis]

Surely you, as a "one-man one-vote" kind of person, can accept this verdict of the majority of Greek Cypriots ....

I am also a human rights kind of person, and as you know no majority can limit the human rights of a minority.

Dear Pirati, or eanyonce else,
Please give me examples, where your personal rights or interests could be violated or compromised, because of a possible vote-down by a "united" Turkish Cypriot vote.

The political inequality between citizens of a country is a violation of my human rights by itself:

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

Also, there are many examples of "real" problems that can arise from this. If you have 50% power you can get 50% of everything, and this is definitely not fair. E.g. The TCs might insist for 50% of the budget to always go to their state. When they ask for so many outrageous things, and they can not see the difference between 18% and 50%, whats going to stop from asking even more outrageous things to gain even more from us?

I am from Limassol. How would the non-Limassolians react if tomorrow we demand that Limassol should elect 50% of the parliament members and have a blocking power on everything? Would anybody accept it? For the exact same reason I do not accept that an 18% can have 50% power.
Actually this is not a very good example since Limassolians care about the unity of Cyprus and they wouldn't demand something that would cause problems. On the other hand the TCs have been dreaming of partition for decades.

[magikthrill]

ox pirati! you're form Lemeso??

hehehe j/k

[insan]

I am also a human rights kind of person, and as you know no majority can limit the human rights of a minority.

I am also a human rights kind of person, and as you know no minority can limit the human rights of a majority. There are other components of a state that safeguards the rights of all citizens. The power sharing is not solely dependent to the Senate, where power is shared "equally".

If you have 50% power you can get 50% of everything, and this is definitely not fair.

According to your mentality If you have 50% power you can even get %100 of everything. What's the obstacle preventing the one to get %100 if is able to get %50?

E.g. The TCs might insist for 50% of the budget to always go to their state.

e.g The GCs might insist for %95 of the budget to always go to their state. They have the equal power like TCs have. Could they manage to get %95 of the budget to their state?



This is the question of the day for imbeciles

[magikthrill]

I am also a human rights kind of person, and as you know no minority can limit the human rights of a majority. There are other components of a state that safeguards the rights of all citizens. The power sharing is not solely dependent to the Senate, where power is shared "equally".

Not they can't unless they have a blocking power on every voting matter equivalent to the majority.

According to your mentality If you have 50% power you can even get %100 of everything. What's the obstacle preventing the one to get %100 if is able to get %50?

100% is not needed to block everything. 50% is enough.

e.g The GCs might insist for %95 of the budget to always go to their state. They have the equal power like TCs have. Could they manage to get %95 of the budget to their state?

This is the question of the day for imbeciles

huh

hehehe. my answer is nope they can't do that because you are assuming TCs have blocking power on everything.

[insan]

Not they can't unless they have a blocking power on every voting matter equivalent to the majority.

So according to you if the "minority"[politically equal state partner of GC community] blocks any decision of the majority[politically equal state partner of TC community]; this constitutes a violation of Human rights of GC community, even the decision they have attempted to take would harm TCs interests related with anything. Furthermore, you imply that if they have any legal claims regarding any decision taken by GC Senators; they should apply to Supreme Court or ECHR, instead of blocking the decision of GC senators in Senate.

Excellent! This so encouraging the co-existence of two communities! Just how Tassos says: "Just, viable, correct, Eouropean blah blah"

hehehe. my answer is nope they can't do that because you are assuming TCs have blocking power on everything.

So how will TCs get %50 of everything while GCs also have blocking power on everything?

[magikthrill]

So according to you if the "minority"[politically equal state partner of GC community] blocks any decision of the majority[politically equal state partner of TC community]; this constitutes a violation of Human rights of GC community, even the decision they have attempted to take would harm TCs interests related with anything. Furthermore, you imply that if they have any legal claims regarding any decision taken by GC Senators; they should apply to Supreme Court or ECHR, instead of blocking the decision of GC senators in Senate.

Excellent! This so encouraging the co-existence of two communities! Just how Tassos says: "Just, viable, correct, Eouropean blah blah"

I'm sorry. Can you post out exactly where I say this would be a violatio of human rights, cause I don't remember saying that anywhere. I believe I was just responding to your comments.

And personally I don't oppose TCs having blocking power in key issues but on everything then htats just absurd.

So how will TCs get %50 of everything while GCs also have blocking power on everything?

This is what I don't understand either. Assuming each community will have its own interest I dont understand how an agreement will be made.

[insan]

I'm sorry. Can you post out exactly where I say this would be a violatio of human rights, cause I don't remember saying that anywhere. I believe I was just responding to your comments.

I've got the impression that you imply it.

And personally I don't oppose TCs having blocking power in key issues but on everything then htats just absurd.

Having the "blocking power" on everything does not mean that TCs will block everything. TCs have the right to block any bill which harms or have the potential to harm the interests and rights of TC community. Don't worry about it TCs don't block the "wedding ceremony" of Rulla and Andreas.

This is what I don't understand either. Assuming each community will have its own interest I dont understand how an agreement will be made.

Each community will have both common interests and their own interests as well.
[/quote]

[pantelis]

There is a saying, but I don't remember how it goes, in Greek.

In Chinese it goes like this: 盜賊識盜賊

The English one is, "it takes a thief to know a thief".

The Greek one I think says that, "a thief, is more worried about being cheated, than an honest man is". ( please correct me)

Is there a Turkish saying to this effect?

This is waht is going on here. The CCs or the TCs do not trust the people within their own community, how could they trust each other?

I have said this, many times. All we need is good, fair laws and a procedure to prevent the politicians from abusing these laws.....for their personal gains. We have seen enough evidence of this abuse, while being governed in our own separate ways.

[insan]

I have said this, many times. All we need is good, fair laws and a procedure to prevent the politicians from abusing these laws.....for their personal gains.

Don't forget their special service for Big boys of Cyprus who bring them in power and take or keep them there...

[erolz]

Surely you, as a "one-man one-vote" kind of person, can accept this verdict of the majority of Greek Cypriots ....

I am also a human rights kind of person, and as you know no majority can limit the human rights of a minority.

One people can deny the rights of another people - by denying they are a people and this is exactly what you do. You deny us our rights as a people. This denial has been and remains at the root of the Cyprus problem. So in effect you are a human rights kind of person only as long as you get to decide who is a people and who is not. If the decision is made according to the charters on human rights, rather than by yourself alone then you are not a human rights kind of person - you are a denier of human rights of others and an insiter of your own.