phoenix wrote:
No, he must still be "neutral" because he admits they have expropriated GC properties . . . .
What's actually expropriated of foreigners living in the "TRNC" is their dignity or perhaps they never had any to begin with...
phoenix wrote:
No, he must still be "neutral" because he admits they have expropriated GC properties . . . .
CopperLine wrote:Get Real, aka Sherlock, that would be 'come and visit' because as I write this post I am actually in Cyprus. Had I been in Canada I'd have written 'go and visit'. What a sleuth you are, nothing gets past you. Nothing.
boomerang wrote:Read article 1 and wheep all you partitionists
http://www.icao.int/icaonet/dcs/7300_cons.pdf
It explains as to why the UK failed miserably in her attempt to have direct flights...
Get Real! wrote:phoenix wrote:
No, he must still be "neutral" because he admits they have expropriated GC properties . . . .
What's actually expropriated of foreigners living in the "TRNC" is their dignity or perhaps they never had any to begin with...
Get Real! wrote:CopperLine wrote:But Boomerang the point is, following the example, that if Syria started flights to TRNC it wouldn't matter if RoC gave consent or not. RoC's consent would be irrelevant."Can anyone seriously think the RoC will give its consent on such flights?"
If Syria is a member of the ICAO then she has to abide by its rules!
CopperLine wrote:So, Get Real, why have Turkish Airlines, Cyprus Turkish Airlines, Pegasus Airlines amongst others - all of whom fly to/from Ercan and to/from the UK not been subject to (a) sanction from the UK (a contracting party of ICAO), (b) sanction from ICAO itself, nor (c) has RoC 'taken ICAO to the ICJ' over these airlines' violations.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests