Cyprus-Forum.com

[Main_Source]

What excuses? Kifeas is right...If they were both to have a meeting, then there must be a mutual respect. Although, as Talat keeps on running his mouth to the media with petty accusations, there is obviously no respect on his behalf.

Unless Talat is thick, then he obviously doesnt care about gaining respect from Papadopolous, as its a big ask alone to meet Talat, as it would be recognising the leader of 'TRNC'...wanting this AND saying crap in the media about Papdopolous, thats just taking the piss.

Brother, is your family originally from the South and if so, where?

also, seeing as your TC and not a settler or opportunist buying cheap land, I wouldnt expect you to give up your land for nothing.

[erolz]

I wouldnt expect you to give up your land for nothing.

You would expect us to hold out continued hope of return of lands in the south for 30 years (and counting) rather than accept the reality and the compensation offered to us for our loss ('exchanged' land in the north) and move on with our lives putting the past behind us? Some TC have done this (refusing exchange land) and hang on to their dreams of return of their pre 74 land but most have not. Is it so unreasonable of those chose to accept reality beyond their personal control and move on? TC that have taken exchange land have given up their rights to their land in the south. Many did this reluctantly initally but had little choice then and having done it reluctantly 30 years ago have now moved on.

By the way no expects you to give up your land for nothing. In a settlement GC that lost land in the south will either get the land back or compensation or a combination. We can argue about how many return and how compensation is determined but to say that TC are asking that GC accept the loss of land for nothing is not an accurate description of what TC are saying imo.

[brother]

Brother, is your family originally from the South and if so, where?

Dad from Tohni and mum from limassol

[Kifeas]

Sorry for my delay in answering but it seems you guys have been getting on fine without me.

Dear Kifeas

I understand your question now that you have clarified it, the lands in the north abondoned by the GC, are the legal owners of the properties, and that is fact but the unfortunate circumstances that we find ourselves in will eventually let some return and some will be compensated, wether this is morally right or wrong is not in our hands but for peace i am willing to give up my family lands but expect to be compensated

There is not much more i can say on the topic but that hopefully all that want to return will be given the chance and those who do not are fully compensated.

Therefore you accept that the GCs are the legal owners of those properties, although de facto they are not in their possession, due to the unfortunate circumstances that we all find ourselves for the last 30 years.
Am I right?

[Kifeas]

Brother, is your family originally from the South and if so, where?

Dad from Tohni and mum from limassol

Then why do you say in your location description that you are from north Cyprus when in fact your origin is from places geographically located in the southern part of Cyprus?

[LANDJO]

Dear all

I have followed this surreal property debate, both in the press and in the forum, and I have a question for Kifeas and the others who, albeit with slightly less vehemence, support the GC point of view.

First of all, I can not imagine that you seriously think that the likes of Orams and the renter of the Famagusta restaurant should be forced to demolish their buildings, pay back rent, and return a property which they have purchased under the laws applicable for that region (those of the 'TRNC'). Perhaps they should have been more careful, but they can not willy-nilly be requested to assume full responsibility. I can also not imagine a court outside of the government controlled areas upholding such a stance.

Second of all, the real culprit has to be the TC administration, or the TRNC and the federal state preceding it. They have expropriated lands and sold them off or given them away to refugees (although no one seems to be clear on the details). Given that the TRNC is not recognized, it can not be sued in a Cypriot court - in fact, only citizens can.

Obviously, since we cannot simply throw out the current residents, it all comes down to compensation. Who, do you think, should pay this compensation?

- Turkey: Perhaps. But it is hard to argue that Turkey has profited from these properties, especially given the massive amounts of aid they have poured into the North.

- TRNC: They are not recognized, so how can you sue them?

- The current owners: If they have received the lands in exchange for lands in the South or if they have bought their property at market prices, this would not be a fair solution.

I understand you want a culprit, but who can it be? What would your ideal and fair property solution be?

[erolz]

Kiefas can I ask who you consier the legal owners of land in the US or Autralia (and elsewgere) that was stolen from native pepoles is.

If you fins this question offensive or irrelevant then please just ignore it as is your right to do so. I am not trying to justify anything re Cyprus here by the way but am curious as to your views.

[Kifeas]

Dear all

I have followed this surreal property debate, both in the press and in the forum, and I have a question for Kifeas and the others who, albeit with slightly less vehemence, support the GC point of view.

First of all, I can not imagine that you seriously think that the likes of Orams and the renter of the Famagusta restaurant should be forced to demolish their buildings, pay back rent, and return a property which they have purchased under the laws applicable for that region (those of the 'TRNC'). Perhaps they should have been more careful, but they can not willy-nilly be requested to assume full responsibility. I can also not imagine a court outside of the government controlled areas upholding such a stance.

Second of all, the real culprit has to be the TC administration, or the TRNC and the federal state preceding it. They have expropriated lands and sold them off or given them away to refugees (although no one seems to be clear on the details). Given that the TRNC is not recognized, it can not be sued in a Cypriot court - in fact, only citizens can.

Obviously, since we cannot simply throw out the current residents, it all comes down to compensation. Who, do you think, should pay this compensation?

- Turkey: Perhaps. But it is hard to argue that Turkey has profited from these properties, especially given the massive amounts of aid they have poured into the North.

- TRNC: They are not recognized, so how can you sue them?

- The current owners: If they have received the lands in exchange for lands in the South or if they have bought their property at market prices, this would not be a fair solution.

I understand you want a culprit, but who can it be? What would your ideal and fair property solution be?

What is exactly your question is what I do not understand.

[Kifeas]

Kiefas can I ask who you consier the legal owners of land in the US or Autralia (and elsewgere) that was stolen from native pepoles is.

If you fins this question offensive or irrelevant then please just ignore it as is your right to do so. I am not trying to justify anything re Cyprus here by the way but am curious as to your views.

Actually now that you put this question, I must admit that I have to rethink the whole issue again.

After all, aren't the Greek Cypriots the aborigine tribe of Cyprus? In Africa we have the Zulus and the Mao-Mao, in Australia we have the Maoris, in America we have the Indians, In Europe we have the Gypsies, in Sahara desert we have the Nomads and in Cyprus we have the Rums.

[erolz]

After all, aren't the Greek Cypriots the aborigine tribe of Cyprus?

I believe their is evidence of people from 'neoltihic age' in Cyprus. They are probably the true 'abiriginol' people of Cyprus and niot really Greek in that they pre date ancient Greek culture. At least that's my understanding but I am not a historian. It' also my understanding that these peoples no longer exist (unlike abiriginol people elsewhere in the globe). Basically I think Europe pretty much 'destroyed' (assimilated / developed / evolved) it's abiriginol peoples thoudands of years before we went into the rest of the world to acheive the same there (a process that is still continuing today I might add)

In Africa we have the Zulus and the Mao-Mao, in Australia we have the Maoris,

Don't let my New Zealand partner hear that The Maoris are in New Zealand not Australia and they themselves were 'settlers' from Samoa - though I do not beleieve their is any evidence of human habitation in New Zealand before their arrival.