Cyprus-Forum.com

[donyork]

I hate to be boring by sticking to the point of this topic- which is about the claim that the south can now issue European arrest warrants against foreigners ‘unlawfully’ occupying former GC property in the north. I also hate to be boring by pointing out that they can't. I do not know whether the politicians who passed this amendment have actually bothered to read the relevant EU law but the upshot is that it gives them no such power.

Under Article 2(2) mandatory arrest warrants can only be issued and executed in respect of the crimes specifically listed — terrorism, drug trafficking, arson and so forth — and living in a GC house ain't one of them (not surprisingly). Under Article 2(4) warrants can be issued for other crimes, but only if the other executing state recognises the same crime — no one else does. Under Article 4(7b) the crime which is the subject of the warrant must have taken place on the territory of the issuing state and be within the jurisdiction of the executing state — GC's may argue that the north is the same as the south, but the north is certainly not within the jurisdiction of any other country. Finally, and in any case, a warrant cannot be issued against any existing occupier for that is breach of Article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which disallows respectively increasing penalties for a past offence (i.e. the date at which the alleged crime took place) so only future buyers are targets, or would be if it were not that for the other reasons given above, no warrant would be effective anyway. And if all that were not enough, the amendment is publicly stated to be aimed only at foreigners, which makes it discriminatory and therefore unenforceable on that ground alone. As I say, you wonder if these people read the laws they claim to be citing. Clearly, they don't. Sorry to interrupt, just thought I'd mention it.

[erolz]

Do you think TP read it? Supported it's aims? It's means?

Since you ask me what i think the answer is "no", I don't think he supported the aims of that document.

What about read it?

The fact is though, that what I think or what you think, is nothing more than a guess. Do you think it is correct to throw mud at people just because you guess they supported something in the past?

The point is Piratis that you try and dismiss the Akritas Plan as an insignificant document on the basis that it was the work or an uninportant minority section of GC that had neither control or influence over GC views and ACTIONS as a whole. My view is that you know this not to be true - you know that it was the work of senior GC in the adminstration of the time, at the highest levels, who were not just some 'fringe minority' that could not persue the plan using their senior positions. My view is that you are puprposely trying to 'pervert history' to deny GC culpability and illegal acts. But maybe I am wrong. Maybe you really believe that the Arkitas plan is an insignificant document of no relevance. That it was the work of a minority that had no power or ability to pursue it. Maybe you really believe this. I am not sure which is worse - in terms of trying to find a fair solution to the current day problems in Cyprus.

[MicAtCyp]

The Akritas Plan was describing a procedure that would end within one night, the maximum within a week. This procedure DID not include violence, but was suggesting violence as one of the 2 options for the last night. It was very clear that it should be a FAST 2-3 days action, and it stressed this QUICKNESS many times in it's text.

In my opinion the Akritas Plan had so much similarity with what happened in reality, as the similarity between a train and a bicycle. Yet the Tcs keep using it is their altimate proof.
Furthermore if the Akritas Plan was THE PLAN then how many times should it's "last night events" be repeated before moving to the "checkmate" move? I really wonder....

Anyone who disagrees lets talk about it with real extracts from the Akritas Plan.

I do not use the Akritas plan to justify any action of TC and Turkey. I use it for what it is - an inditment of those GC that wrote, read or supported it's objectives and means without even knowing of it's existance. I use it for what it is - a document that show true GC desires of the time and the explicit admission of a need for GC to hide these true desire and pretend otherwise. I use it for what it is - a clear adminssion that some GC at the time were more than prepared to use illegal means, deception and violence to gain their desires

I agree, but claiming that the Akritas Plan was THE PLAN is quite different. My opinion is that every paramilitary group (GC or TC) of the time had it's objectives(call it plan if you like). And we also had the Government under Makarios who did not know where to start from, and the brake away Government of the TCs inside the Nicosia enclave that was waiting for the ships to arrive...
Me personally don't need the Akritas Plan to prove me anything, like I don't need the map found at the drawer of the TC Minister of agriculture to prove me anything.
The events that happened prove me everything.

[MicAtCyp]

Im saying dont respond with stupid comments.

No Vp, I will do you the favour and respond, because according to your oppinion everything that proves you completely wrong, and of low IQ is stupid.

[erolz]

I agree, but claiming that the Akritas Plan was THE PLAN is quite different.

All I was doing was refuting Piratis' claims. According to him the Akritas plan signifies nothing - excpet the views of a mariginal and minority section of GC that had no power or influence to try and implement the plan or influence GC in general. This is just not that case as far as I am concerned.

Certainly TC can overplay the significance of the Akritas plan - but this is no different than GC underplaying it. Piratis imo decided to underplay it to an extreme degree - so I responded with what I think is a fair assesment (not an overplaying). I never said it was the only plan and that each and every GC had signed up to it. It was imo clearly the work of some very influencial and powerful GC both in government and within the GC 'irregular' forces. I think it is extermely likely that Makarios, Grivas, Clerides, TP, Yeorgardis, Sampson and others new about it and lagley supported both it's aims and it's means.

In my opinion the Akritas Plan had so much similarity with what happened in reality, as the similarity between a train and a bicycle.
Anyone who disagrees lets talk about it with real extracts from the Akritas Plan.

I would be more than willing to do a section by section analysis of what the plan says and what the GC was actually doing at the time and see how well it matches. However I am off for a couple of weeks so I guess I will have to leave that for now and perhaps return another time if and when attmemps are made to dismiss it as ingsignifcant once more.

[Viewpoint]

-mikkie2-if anyone bothered to read my post the figures I gave out were for discussion with ???? all over the post I even asked for any sites where I could research the percentages and how much common land we had pre 1974.
I wasnt stating that I had facts turkcyp even gave me a site where I found the percentages discussed by Denktash and Makarios.
But all I got was anger??? and condescending remarks, very disappointing attitude.
I wouldnt meet MicAtCyp so we would never fight, the divide makes me feel safe for this reason.

[-mikkie2-]

I wouldnt meet MicAtCyp so we would never fight, the divide makes me feel safe for this reason.

Probably safe from your own urges!

The problem is you can't seem to take a combative approach to discussions. It does not mean that the arguee is trying to insult you. It means putting pressure on you to justify certain aspects of your argument.

[Viewpoint]

-mikkie2-

Probably safe from your own urges!

does it really matter?? the safety of partition is a great one theres no denying it, makes us both feel safe and protected.

The problem is you can't seem to take a combative approach to discussions. It does not mean that the arguee is trying to insult you. It means putting pressure on you to justify certain aspects of your argument.

Come on theres a big difference between constructive cirtiscim and condescending belittling insults (combative approach are we at war again??). I was asking for input, response and got abuse.
I can argue a point as much as the next man dont worry but when you are faced with a barrage of insults, is answering someone with that sort of mentality worth it? The are either shit stirers or trying to annoy you so you respond with the same level of insults, its just not worth it.

In short it is the Cyprus issue, we cant get on, we cant see eye to eye so why force it, the conversations on this forum alone are good reason and reinforce why we should move towards recognized partition.

[MicAtCyp]

if anyone bothered to read my post the figures I gave out were for discussion

For discussion?! Is that why you wrote them with so big letters as your head? Who you think you are kidding re?

[Viewpoint]

So the size of the letters are more important than the content, good logic , didnt you notice all the question marks ????????????? please refrain from using RE when talikng with TCs its an insult.

For the sake of peace on the forum lets just avoid responding to each others posts for about 30+ years. No response necessary.