Viewpoint wrote:Kikapu wrote:Viewpoint wrote:Kikapu wrote:
It won't be the BBF (Confederacy) part, or the Undemocratic, Racist, or the Human Rights violation part.
Anything else, sure, I will lick it...Happy now VP.??
What if it is? what if it is repackaged with the same basic structure? can the Gcs risk another NO?
You only want to present the same AP 2004 so that it can be rejected, so that you can run around making the same claims that you have said yes to AP and the GC's said NO, so that you can ( you think) get recognition. You don't want a settlement, you want another NO vote. Why do you think Christofias doesn't want the AP on the table at all, because he knows the sneaky games that you are up to. And one more thing, the UN is not pushing the AP to the table. They want the Cypriots to find their own solution, but will be on hand to help. No body trusts Talat by insisting that the AP should be the basis for the next round of talks. Besides, I don't want any Racist, Undemocratic, Human Rights Violation, and Anti Cypriot plan on any talks. Forget it VP, better start accepting a real settlement, because the AP 2004 Confederacy is DEAD.
Directly or indirectly the AP or call it what you want, will be around, the UN will not start from point zero, they can rename it to suit the GCs but the bottom line is that this is the starting point, you accepted licking up what you spat out, demonizing this plan served no purpose as this is the basis for all negotiations, where we take it is up to us but if the final blueprint is not accpetable to TCs we to can reject it just like you have in the past, we will sit on either sides of the table and both sides have the right of rejection. We will not be forced into accepting anything that put our community at risk or danger, as long as GCs stick to the BBF and political equality we will make some headway.
You can re-package the AP anyway you want VP, if the substance is the same, so will be the results, except the plan won't even get off the ground to be voted on. You are not going to get another "NO" vote from the GC's, because they are not going to vote on anything that resembles AP 2004, so that you can claim the "high road" when in reality you support something that is not in the best interest of overwhelming majority of Cypriots, and the quote from your previous post shows us just that very clearly.
I said in my above quote;
"It won't be the BBF (Confederacy) part, or the Undemocratic, Racist, or the Human Rights violation part".
Your response was;
"What if it is? what if it is repackaged with the same basic structure? can the Gcs risk another NO?"
You do not support anything that is fair unless it is Undemocratic, Racist, and violate Human Rights. Christofias will not come out and call you Racist with the plan you support. No, instead, he has put the Turkish Army on the table to withdraw from Cyprus as a occupying force. No country in the world supports occupying force, unless of course they them self are an occupying force, such as Turkey and USA, but in general, no one is going to fault the GC's for demanding for the Turkish Army to leave to find a solution. The other of course is the Turkish Guarantorship. That too will be on the table as a non acceptance by the GC's. Once again, no country is going to fault the GC's for not wanting other nations having a say-so in Cyprus without their approval, and you will find other countries supporting the GC's position on this. The argument that the Turkish Army is there to protect the TC's, that argument has run out long time ago with thousands of Cypriots crossing back and forth without any incidences with yet another crossing to be opened in Nicosia, perhaps the most significant of all others in the last 5 years.
Just those two items above will be rejected by the TC's and Turkey, and the whole "peace plan" will be derailed, so don't worry too much using the 2004 AP as a basis, because it will not even be tackled, because of the other two main topics. So you see VP, you will not be given the chance to take the "high road"claims undeservedly just as you did in 2004, because it is you, who will be saying "NO" next time around.