Cyprus-Forum.com

[Othellos]

How will we calculate the loss of value of TC properties that ruined and derelict by GC government in 1963-67 period.....(etc)

Insan, is this what you really want? To estimate the losses of TCs Vs GCs from the beginning of the Cyprus problem to prsesent?

O.

[insan]

How will we calculate the loss of value of TC properties that ruined and derelict by GC government in 1963-67 period.....(etc)

Insan, is this what you really want? To estimate the losses of TCs Vs GCs from the beginning of the Cyprus problem to prsesent?

O.

Original TC owners should have the right to insist that whatever is currently standing in their properties should be demolished, and a new house built for them instead, of the same size and value as their original home (if they want a bigger house, they should be able to pay the difference and ask for a bigger house).

My intention and what I was trying to put forth for consideration was very obvious, Othellos. So, please.... don't turn it into an x vs y dispute.

[Othellos]

My intention and what I was trying to put forth for consideration was very obvious, Othellos. So, please.... don't turn it into an x vs y dispute.

All i am saying, Insan is that when we want to talk about X's loss then we must also be prepared to discuss Y's loss as well. Doesn't that make sense to you?

O.

[insan]

My intention and what I was trying to put forth for consideration was very obvious, Othellos. So, please.... don't turn it into an x vs y dispute.

All i am saying, Insan is that when we want to talk about X's loss then we must also be prepared to discuss Y's loss as well. Doesn't that make sense to you?

O.

Of course. Ok then. I've opened this topic as a counter discussion to the one where the properties of GCs are being discussed. So, please create a new topic that involves both then I'll participate with my views and opinions.

[insan]

Insan,


'Instead of focusing on the present and the future, people keep digging in the past. The proplem is not the past. The problem is the "now", which in it's turn, screws-up the future. I see sick attitudes and situations in the governments, leadership and private sectors of both communities. I see domestic and foreign interests working against the interests of this beautiful island. Greed and corruption of the, "few", opportunists, (for power money or both) make the life the, "many", noble people harder and unfair.
Let's change the mood of this forum by concentrating on the present and future of this place. Let's uncover the dirt of the "now". The dirt of the past can not be easily verified or accepted by all. The present, on the other hand, is right in front of our eyes. Many people see things but cannot see through them. Only if we fix the present, we can have a healthy future."

I agree with you Pantelis. You say let's do this and that in order to fix all the problems that have become a huge heap in front of us due to the mistakes comitted by x, y, z....


Ok. We need to hold a massive bi-communal rally for this to force our "representatives" to settle down to work in direction of masses. However the fact is that masses have still no common ground on what's to be done.

[MicAtCyp]

Sorry but I am confused now. What is being asked of me (if anything)??.....
I simply asked for some examples ...

Nothing is being asked of you Erol.You asked for an example and I gave you one. What is it that you don't understand?

This is clearly unsatisfactory, and perhaps one area where the Annan Plan should be improved for TCs: Original TC owners should have the right to insist that whatever is currently standing in their properties should be demolished, and a new house built for them instead, of the same size and value as their original home (if they want a bigger house, they should be able to pay the difference and ask for a bigger house).

And why should it be improved to refer ONLY to the TCs and not to the GCs as well, if I may ask? And why all the restorations be paid by all, and not separately by the component states who did it? (or the individuals who did it for their private use?)

That was one of the most canny elements of the Anan Plan philosophy actually.It remembered what majority means only whenever the majority would pay. And only whenever the minority would get the properties that the majority would pay 82% of the compensation!!!

[Alexandros Lordos]

This is clearly unsatisfactory, and perhaps one area where the Annan Plan should be improved for TCs: Original TC owners should have the right to insist that whatever is currently standing in their properties should be demolished, and a new house built for them instead, of the same size and value as their original home (if they want a bigger house, they should be able to pay the difference and ask for a bigger house).

And why should it be improved to refer ONLY to the TCs and not to the GCs as well, if I may ask? And why all the restorations be paid by all, and not separately by the component states who did it? (or the individuals who did it for their private use?)

That was one of the most canny elements of the Anan Plan philosophy actually.It remembered what majority means only whenever the majority would pay. And only whenever the minority would get the properties that the majority would pay 82% of the compensation!!!

Well, of course it must apply for GCs as well. We can't have two different measuring sticks on this.

If exceptions to property restitutions will apply, they will have to be such as to protect GC current occupants of TC properties just as much as they protect TC current occupants of GC properties. Let's not forget that many GC refugees live in TC properties, and if TCs are given the right to "not become a refugee one more time", then the same argument holds for the GCs in TC properties.

Similarly, if properties that do not fall under the "protection of current occupants" category are to be restored to their former condition before being returned to their owners, this should apply just as much for derelict GC properties in the north as it will apply for derelict TC properties in the south.

Concerning the costs for such restoration, as well as "compensation for loss of use", I fully agree that the responsible side should pay, rather than "all of us paying" - but again I believe there can be a balance to this. Turkey and the TCs should pay for the compensation of GCs, but Greece and the GCs should pay for the compensation of TCs.

Why Turkey? Because of the invasion, and all the inappropriate meddling that led up to it. Why Greece? Because of the coup, and all the inappropriate meddling that led up to it. Why GCs? Because they have been using (or neglecting) TC properties all these years. Why TCs? Because they have been using (or neglecting) GC properties all these years.

Anyway, this is what my own square logic is telling me. Correct me if I am wrong ...

[uzan]

How will we calculate the loss of value of TC properties that ruined and derelict by GC government in 1963-67 period.....(etc)

Insan, is this what you really want? To estimate the losses of TCs Vs GCs from the beginning of the Cyprus problem to prsesent?



O.

Otellos,yes this is what we really want.To estimate the loss of both sides.( then you would understand that both communities can be accused being thieves).
good day

[insan]

Anyway, this is what my own square logic is telling me. Correct me if I am wrong ...

Alexandros, to me what you suggested is fairly balanced.

[erolz]

Nothing is being asked of you Erol.You asked for an example and I gave you one. What is it that you don't understand?

Well I thought I was asking for an expample related to this

I am not saying everything is angelic and perfect in the free areas regarding the TC properties. As the case of Mustafa describes (although that is a remote case and NOT the general happening) it is not so. But on the other hand can we compare this situation, with what is happening at the pseudo, where the state itself gives our properties to the settlers and they sell them to foreigners? And not only that, we even see members of this forum cynically expressing joy and applauding this illegality...

That is and example of members cynically expressing joy and aplauding the giving of pre 74 GC properties to settlers than then sell them. What you gave me was Viewpoints comment

To be honest I dont think he will be visiting the north in the near future if at all, so he has nothing to worry about.

Which refers to a totaly different thing and to be honest is not an 'cynical expression of joy' except by the most extreme infernce. So if you still claim that members here have cynically expressed joy and appluded the giving of pre 74 GC properties to settlers that then sell them to foreigners - I would still like to see an example of this.