Cyprus-Forum.com

[DT.]

Do we alsohave the right to reject anything the EU and UN try to impose on us if we feel it is undemocratic and racist yet meets GC demands?

This is what you quoted. Please answer Kiks question about what racist or undemocratic demands we have made.

We feel being the ultimate words, the GCs seem to think that because they do not like what the EU and UN support eg the AP it is undemocratic and against their human rights. You people need to learn there are many shades of democracy as administered by different countries they vary according to the history and sociological structure of the country concerned. It is for this reason that we TCs will not give away our community rights to become just another minority under your GC admnistered "democracy" we are partners and want to be treated as such we demand an effective and guaranteed say in our own future.

Name me one federation or confederation where they demand ethnically clean constituent states.

Obviously you do not know what we demand, go study and come back in a few days.

Do you accept freedom of settlement?

YES

Ah I see...you allow them to settle but will not allow them to vote where they live.

Go do some more research you obvously have pre-concieved bised ideas about TC demands, you are not to be taken seriously.

Then please go ahead VP and educate me on your understanding of the contxt of bi-zonality as the turkish side demands it.

[Kikapu]

What I reject is clear violations of ANYONES Democratic and Human Rights. Show me where the EU and the UN has violated any of those rights to the TC's during these recent talks on BBF proposals that I have refused to defend the TC's.!

Do we alsohave the right to reject anything the EU and UN try to impose on us if we feel it is undemocratic and racist yet meets GC demands?

Most of tyour other arguments regarding the EU/UN were silly, so no point in trying to respond to them, but I would like to on the above quote that you made.

Can you tell me what Racist and Undemocratic things that the GC's are demanding from the EU/UN that you feel it will be justified in rejecting them, because if there are such demands by the GC's, I will join you in rejecting them also, so please tell us what those Democratic and Human Rights violations are, that it is asked by the GC's to be imposed on the TC's by the EU and UN.

Our community rights.

Guarantees.

I did not know such things fall under the EU/UN Democratic and Human Rights violation.!

They could be interpreted as being "Minority Rights" perhaps, because I have never heard of the EU or UN ever using the terms "Community Rights" as being one of the Pillars of Democracy. Do we even know what those "community rights" are. What I mean is, if something was negotiated in the 1960 Constitution between the parties at that time, and another Constitution may be negotiated today between the parties, what TC's Human Rights are being violated by the GC's if they do not want to agree with any provisions from the past. The UN/EU are not demanding these "community rights" for the TC's, because they are not rights that are being violated, but only if offered by one side and accepted by the other side. Same goes with the Guarantees. Sorry, VP, but your above examples do not fall under the umbrella of the EU's or the UN's definition of Democratic and Human Rights violations. Perhaps I'm wrong and that CopperLine can set me straight.!

Do you believe that the UN and EU would accept or back a solution that would be against democracy and human rights?

Are the 1960 agreements valid?

Do they provide both community with rights?

Do they contains security guarantees?

Or have thse agreements been scraped in which case the "RoC" would not exist.

Do you believe that the UN and EU would accept or back a solution that would be against democracy and human rights?

Obviously Kofi Annan would have accepted Democratic and Human Rights violations at that time, but the UN in general would not. I would say that the EU does not accept them either for the EU club members, unless you have some examples you want to provide us with, that such violation go on in the EU today. What the EU and the UN may have went along with in 2004 with the AP cannot be used as a guideline as to what Human Rights violation they are willing to accept, but rather accepted the outcome had the Cypriots wanted it that way, although the EU would have demanded changes as soon as possible, or that Cyprus would not have been accepted into the EU club, which was the wishes of some, but as you know, the TC side said YES to the plan along with all the Democratic and Human Rights violations that were to be imposed on the GC's, and the GC's said NO to the plan and all the Democratic and Human Rights that were to be imposed on themselves. Can you honestly say, that the GC's did something wrong by refusing such a plan.? Now that Cyprus is in the EU, things have changed dramatically and the EU will NOT accept any such violations up front. Either all the states in the EU club will follow the rules or they are not members. No exceptions, so don't wait for the EU to bend the rules on Democratic and Human Rights and by claiming that there are different shades of Democracy around the world, and that is true, is no business of the EU to follow those kinds of shady Democracies.

Are the 1960 agreements valid?

Yes they are to a point, as explained below.!

Do they provide both community with rights?

Yes they do, but these are totally different than Democratic and Human Rights that you were complaining about. These are the agreements made between the parties. By not including any of these "community rights" in the next constitution, does not violate anyone’s Human or Democratic Rights. It just means that one sides does not want to extend the other side more rights than they have for themselves, unless they are in the form of "Minority Rights" which is not what you want. You want, and rightly so, political equality, which means, equal rights. Unless the GC's are denying the TC's equal rights as they see fit for themselves, your complaints will be ignored by the UN and the EU. No one is entitled to "community rights" if one side does not want to extend them. This was always going to be the danger for the TC's when Denktash agreed to BBF, because the present 1960 constitution does not include BBF in order for the TC's to keep all the the provisions in the constitution such as the "community rights and guarantees".

Since a new format has been accepted by the two communities for Cyprus, then you are going to have a new constitution. We made the choice to agree to the BBF along with the GC's. The moment the new constitution is in place, the 1960 constitution will be shelved. Naturally, many of the provisions will be kept, but only if both sides agree to them. I don't even think you can go back to the original 1960 constitution even if the BBF on the table now was agreed to be abandoned and return back to the unitary state, if both sides do not agree with the provisions in the 1960 constitution anymore, because once again, there will be a change in agreement to go from a BBF to Unitary state.

So, either way, even though the 1960 constitution is valid today with all the provisions you have stated above as being true, it is only functioning in that format until the political solution is found but need not be followed exactly to the letter, just because of the political situation, and Cyprus being allowed to enter the EU club without the approval by the TC's as given to them in their "community rights" only goes to prove that fact. Had Denktash did not agree to BBF and not declared the north as a "trnc", then you could have gone back to the original 1960 constitution and no one would have been able to demand changes to it, unless it was challenged in the courts. I don't even think the EU would have accepted Cyprus into the club under the 1960 constitution had the TC's remained in the government and that 1963 and 1974 never happened without first changes made to it, to make it more Democratic to EU standards.

At least that is my understanding on how all of the above will/would work/ed out.!

Do they contains security guarantees?

See above explanation on "community rights and guarantees".

Or have thse agreements been scraped in which case the "RoC" would not exist.

Also see above for this explanation, but in a word, the 1960 constitution is functioning and the RoC does exists, but not at 100% because of the TC's not being in the government and the fact that BBF has been agreed on to become the "new country", which will make the 1960 constitution obsolete once another constitution takes it's place. The present 1960 constitution is valid but it is not "firing on all cylinders" right now, but enough to get it to where it need to go, so therefore, it is accepted by the international community as a functioning constitution given the political problems in Cyprus.!

[Viewpoint]

Kikapu

Obviously Kofi Annan would have accepted Democratic and Human Rights violations at that time, but the UN in general would not. I would say that the EU does not accept them either for the EU club members, unless you have some examples you want to provide us with, that such violation go on in the EU today

What the EU and the UN may have went along with in 2004 with the AP cannot be used as a guideline as to what Human Rights violation they are willing to accept,

Arent you contradicting yourself on the one hand you are saying the UN and EU do not accept democratic and human rights violations then in the same breath you say they went along with it, isnt that accepting it and even saying as they did the support the AP?

Can you honestly say, that the GC's did something wrong by refusing such a plan.?

YES, they did not negotiate in good faith and rejected the only solution put to the vote. They have gone back to square one and are no closer to any form a solution good or bad than they were 46 years ago.

Now that Cyprus is in the EU, things have changed dramatically and the EU will NOT accept any such violations up front.

Even if the Cypriots accept it? you place to much faith in the EU who are only interested if they benefit and will use the GC south to their own advantage, do you really think they care about a handful of spoilt GCs? the big boys are main players in the EU and the rest are just followers, where is the great EU solution the GCs thought they had attained on entering the EU gone up in smoke me thinks.

Either all the states in the EU club will follow the rules or they are not members. No exceptions, so don't wait for the EU to bend the rules on Democratic and Human Rights and by claiming that there are different shades of Democracy around the world, and that is true, is no business of the EU to follow those kinds of shady Democracies.

Switzerland the USA are all shades of democracy but not in the EU, not being in the EU is not the end of the world, time you realized that this carrot you try to dangle in front of the TCs has dried up and shrunk beyond recognition. We do not trust a club which does not keep its word.

Yes they do, but these are totally different than Democratic and Human Rights that you were complaining about. These are the agreements made between the parties. By not including any of these "community rights" in the next constitution, does not violate anyone’s Human or Democratic Rights. It just means that one sides does not want to extend the other side more rights than they have for themselves, unless they are in the form of "Minority Rights" which is not what you want.

Isnt that why we have been negotiating for 46 years? This does not mean that what was in the 1960 agreements will be removed from any new agreements in fact due to past experienceies they shoudl be increased and strengthened.

You want, and rightly so, political equality, which means, equal rights. Unless the GC's are denying the TC's equal rights as they see fit for themselves, your complaints will be ignored by the UN and the EU. No one is entitled to "community rights" if one side does not want to extend them. This was always going to be the danger for the TC's when Denktash agreed to BBF, because the present 1960 constitution does not include BBF in order for the TC's to keep all the the provisions in the constitution such as the "community rights and guarantees".

Neither side has signed on the dotted line and it looks like we are not on a fast track to finding any kind of a solution so all your comments about are community rights are guess work, if are concerns and demands are ignored by the UN and EU then there will be no solution and the past 36 years are testiment to that fact. If any new agreements does not incorporate our community ritghts and guarantees you can rest assured we will use our democratic right to say NO.

Since a new format has been accepted by the two communities for Cyprus, then you are going to have a new constitution. We made the choice to agree to the BBF along with the GC's. The moment the new constitution is in place, the 1960 constitution will be shelved. Naturally, many of the provisions will be kept, but only if both sides agree to them. I don't even think you can go back to the original 1960 constitution even if the BBF on the table now was agreed to be abandoned and return back to the unitary state, if both sides do not agree with the provisions in the 1960 constitution anymore, because once again, there will be a change in agreement to go from a BBF to Unitary state.

Isnt that why everything is up in the air and being negotiated? what will find its way from the 1960s agreements into any new agreeement remains to be seen but you can be certain that if our community rights are watered down and guarantees removed TCs will not be happy in voting YES and have no qualms baout saying NO.

So, either way, even though the 1960 constitution is valid today with all the provisions you have stated above as being true, it is only functioning in that format until the political solution is found but need not be followed exactly to the letter, just because of the political situation, and Cyprus being allowed to enter the EU club without the approval by the TC's as given to them in their "community rights" only goes to prove that fact.

That is a very valid point and can be argued in a court of law because there was no TC acceptence or contribution when deciding to enter the EU the Gcs et again declred themselves the sole rulers of Cyprus and proceeded to do what they wish as was exactly the case in the past.

Had Denktash did not agree to BBF and not declared the north as a "trnc", then you could have gone back to the original 1960 constitution and no one would have been able to demand changes to it, unless it was challenged in the courts. I don't even think the EU would have accepted Cyprus into the club under the 1960 constitution had the TC's remained in the government and that 1963 and 1974 never happened without first changes made to it, to make it more Democratic to EU standards.

Thats why a virgin birth is necessary to start a fresh with a constitution that can only be chnaged if both sides agree, and one that everyone adheres to and knows full well the penalities should they contest or not adhere to all of its content.

but in a word, the 1960 constitution is functioning and the RoC does exists, but not at 100% because of the TC's not being in the government and the fact that BBF has been agreed on to become the "new country", which will make the 1960 constitution obsolete once another constitution takes it's place. The present 1960 constitution is valid but it is not "firing on all cylinders" right now, but enough to get it to where it need to go, so therefore, it is accepted by the international community as a functioning constitution given the political problems in Cyprus.!

You are totally correct without the heart=TCs how can anything function properly thats why we have rights which we will never give up and demand be carried forward into any new solution. the GCs have to come to terms with the fact that it was them that did not want the constititution they use today and that any new agreement will mean that they have to take into consideration the demands and needs of a partner in the TCs.

[boomerang]

for ffs stop whining VP and just visit...

[Kikapu]

Obviously Kofi Annan would have accepted Democratic and Human Rights violations at that time, but the UN in general would not. I would say that the EU does not accept them either for the EU club members, unless you have some examples you want to provide us with, that such violation go on in the EU today

What the EU and the UN may have went along with in 2004 with the AP cannot be used as a guideline as to what Human Rights violation they are willing to accept,

Kikapu,

Arent you contradicting yourself on the one hand you are saying the UN and EU do not accept democratic and human rights violations then in the same breath you say they went along with it, isnt that accepting it and even saying as they did the support the AP?

It is very obvious that many countries who are members of the UN does not have True Democracy and also violate Human Rights. The UN does what it can to improve those situations, but what Kofi Annan did with the AP was totally self interest to please the Bush administration by entering non democratic and Human Rights violation into the AP, so that he can keep his job as the UN Secretary. He got his butt kicked by PapaD on that one, and deservingly too, no matter what mistakes PapaD may have made during the AP negotiations. At some point PapaD knew that Kofi had become "enemy" of Cypriots. Where is Kofi today.? He has no legacy to be remembered by. Cyprus was his last chance to have a great legacy, but he chose to sell his soul to the DEVIL. Good riddance to him.

Can you honestly say, that the GC's did something wrong by refusing such a plan.?

YES, they did not negotiate in good faith and rejected the only solution put to the vote. They have gone back to square one and are no closer to any form a solution good or bad than they were 46 years ago.

I see, so just because the leader of the GC's may have not wanted to negotiate a losing solution, the rest of those who voted OXI for the AP should be punished for doing the right thing. Perhaps if you did not take too much benefits at the expense of the GC's, then they might have said YES to the AP, despite what PapaD did or did not do during the negotiations. Do you not bear most of the responsibilities in the way that the GC's voted.?

If we were to follow your logic however, that if a leader does not perform well during negotiations, then everyone must be then responsible for that failure, will be like blaming all those who died on the Titanic just because the captain of the ship run the ship into the iceberg. Sorry, it does not wash with me of your logic what so ever.!

Now that Cyprus is in the EU, things have changed dramatically and the EU will NOT accept any such violations up front.

Even if the Cypriots accept it? you place to much faith in the EU who are only interested if they benefit and will use the GC south to their own advantage, do you really think they care about a handful of spoilt GCs? the big boys are main players in the EU and the rest are just followers, where is the great EU solution the GCs thought they had attained on entering the EU gone up in smoke me thinks.

Yes VP, even if the Cypriots themselves accept a flawed plan that includes Democratic and Human Rights violations, that the EU will NOT accept it, unlike what the UN might. The GC's have gotten great advantages by being in the EU, and if you don't recognise this simple fact, then ask Talat and Turkey.

Big Boys, Little Boys is irrelevant. Big Boys may be able to shout louder, but Little Boys can still stand their grounds, and they have done so. Kosovo is the prime example.

Either all the states in the EU club will follow the rules or they are not members. No exceptions, so don't wait for the EU to bend the rules on Democratic and Human Rights and by claiming that there are different shades of Democracy around the world, and that is true, is no business of the EU to follow those kinds of shady Democracies.

Switzerland the USA are all shades of democracy but not in the EU, not being in the EU is not the end of the world, time you realized that this carrot you try to dangle in front of the TCs has dried up and shrunk beyond recognition. We do not trust a club which does not keep its word.

Both Switzerland and the USA are True Democracies and are different in how each one operates, and Cyprus can be different also, as long as Democratic and Human Rights of it's citizens are not violated, as they are not in those countries you have chosen as an example. You want to violate those rights by claiming is just a another shade of Democracy. Sorry, that will not work for you to get the EU to bend it's rules to accomodate 120,000 TC's, and shame on you for even thinking about it.

If not being in the EU is not a BIG deal, then why doesn't Talat ask for an agreed partition on land size to be negotiated which will result the north and Turkey not seeing the EU doors ever again.!

Yes they do, but these are totally different than Democratic and Human Rights that you were complaining about. These are the agreements made between the parties. By not including any of these "community rights" in the next constitution, does not violate anyone’s Human or Democratic Rights. It just means that one sides does not want to extend the other side more rights than they have for themselves, unless they are in the form of "Minority Rights" which is not what you want.

Isnt that why we have been negotiating for 46 years? This does not mean that what was in the 1960 agreements will be removed from any new agreements in fact due to past experienceies they shoudl be increased and strengthened.

Sure it does. By having a "New Country" it also means having a new constitution, does it not.? By having a new constitution, it also means the whole thing is up for negotiations, which means there will not be any undemocratic and Human rights violations included as it was done so in the 1960 constitution. This comes with the BBF that it was negotiated, remember.! Obviously not everything needs to be changed, but certainly anything that one side does not want, or at the very least, come to somewhere in the middle. I have yet to see you come anywhere in the middle so far on all the Racist violations that was in the 1960 constitution. In fact, you wanted those violations to expanded as they were done with the AP, which you gave a resounding YES to it. Sorry, such violations will not be accepted by Democracy loving Cypriots for the future of our country of Cyprus as a EU member. I know old habits are hard to get rid off, but you need to do it anyway by refusing to accept anything that is non democratic and violation of Human Rights. I gave you a plan that resolved these issues, but that was too Democratic for you, therefore you have refused it. You cannot keep others land by force and accept to be good neighbours in the same country. Only a fool can have such expectations.

You want, and rightly so, political equality, which means, equal rights. Unless the GC's are denying the TC's equal rights as they see fit for themselves, your complaints will be ignored by the UN and the EU. No one is entitled to "community rights" if one side does not want to extend them. This was always going to be the danger for the TC's when Denktash agreed to BBF, because the present 1960 constitution does not include BBF in order for the TC's to keep all the the provisions in the constitution such as the "community rights and guarantees".

Neither side has signed on the dotted line and it looks like we are not on a fast track to finding any kind of a solution so all your comments about are community rights are guess work, if are concerns and demands are ignored by the UN and EU then there will be no solution and the past 36 years are testiment to that fact. If any new agreements does not incorporate our community ritghts and guarantees you can rest assured we will use our democratic right to say NO.

There are no such things as "community rights". The next best thing is "minority rights" which is not what you want, therefore, the only option left for you, is to be an equal citizen with equal rights just like anyone else in any other True Democratic countries where you will have the same exact rights as anyone else. When you ask for more rights than others as a special group, then you can only ask for it as a "minority rights" and even then, those rights will not violate others Democratic and Human Rights. It just means you have extra protection for you as an individual based on what community you belong to, and only if and when you ask for those extra protections from the majority.

Since a new format has been accepted by the two communities for Cyprus, then you are going to have a new constitution. We made the choice to agree to the BBF along with the GC's. The moment the new constitution is in place, the 1960 constitution will be shelved. Naturally, many of the provisions will be kept, but only if both sides agree to them. I don't even think you can go back to the original 1960 constitution even if the BBF on the table now was agreed to be abandoned and return back to the unitary state, if both sides do not agree with the provisions in the 1960 constitution anymore, because once again, there will be a change in agreement to go from a BBF to Unitary state.

Isnt that why everything is up in the air and being negotiated? what will find its way from the 1960s agreements into any new agreeement remains to be seen but you can be certain that if our community rights are watered down and guarantees removed TCs will not be happy in voting YES and have no qualms baout saying NO.

That's your choice to vote NO on a Democratic plan that does not violate anyone's Human Rights. It will then confirm what my cousin's husband said to me in Cyprus, that the TC's only voted for the AP and not for peace, because any plan that is close to the AP, cannot be possibly be for peace.

So, either way, even though the 1960 constitution is valid today with all the provisions you have stated above as being true, it is only functioning in that format until the political solution is found but need not be followed exactly to the letter, just because of the political situation, and Cyprus being allowed to enter the EU club without the approval by the TC's as given to them in their "community rights" only goes to prove that fact.

That is a very valid point and can be argued in a court of law because there was no TC acceptence or contribution when deciding to enter the EU the Gcs et again declred themselves the sole rulers of Cyprus and proceeded to do what they wish as was exactly the case in the past.

As far as I know, the TC's did not contest RoC entry into the EU when entry talks were on going, which one can interpret as accepting the entry of the RoC into the EU. You can once again thank Denktash for that blunder. It's too little too late now to continue to argue this point. Best thing to do now, is to resolve the political problems of Cyprus, so that all Cypriots can benefit from Cyprus's entry into the EU, which you too will be thankful for one day. This is not a negative for Cyprus, but a positive. If Cyprus did not enter into the EU, there even not have been a AP in 2004 or any negotiations today, as there were nothing in the previous 30+ years before 2004.

Had Denktash did not agree to BBF and not declared the north as a "trnc", then you could have gone back to the original 1960 constitution and no one would have been able to demand changes to it, unless it was challenged in the courts. I don't even think the EU would have accepted Cyprus into the club under the 1960 constitution had the TC's remained in the government and that 1963 and 1974 never happened without first changes made to it, to make it more Democratic to EU standards.

Thats why a virgin birth is necessary to start a fresh with a constitution that can only be chnaged if both sides agree, and one that everyone adheres to and knows full well the penalities should they contest or not adhere to all of its content.

"Virgin Birth" in the AP meant 2 different states which would have become 2 different independent states/countries within a very short time. Another good reason why the GC's said OXI to the AP.

but in a word, the 1960 constitution is functioning and the RoC does exists, but not at 100% because of the TC's not being in the government and the fact that BBF has been agreed on to become the "new country", which will make the 1960 constitution obsolete once another constitution takes it's place. The present 1960 constitution is valid but it is not "firing on all cylinders" right now, but enough to get it to where it need to go, so therefore, it is accepted by the international community as a functioning constitution given the political problems in Cyprus.!

You are totally correct without the heart=TCs how can anything function properly thats why we have rights which we will never give up and demand be carried forward into any new solution. the GCs have to come to terms with the fact that it was them that did not want the constititution they use today and that any new agreement will mean that they have to take into consideration the demands and needs of a partner in the TCs.

Well, sorry to remind you again, but the International community accepts the 1960 constitution being valid even though the TC "heart" as you put it, is missing from it. Life of anything can be maintained without a "heart" if other sources can be used to maintain life, and that's what has been happening with the 1960 constitution, right or wrong. I'm just telling you where we are and what it is, and the last 45 years is a testament to the above statement, because the TC's were partly responsible for refusing to participate by leaving their "heart" in the 1960 constitution, and the International community is well aware of these facts which are also the reasons as to why the north cannot and will not be recognised ever if the legal body in Cyprus does not agree for it to be recognised as a separate entity.

[Viewpoint]

Kikapu

It is very obvious that many countries who are members of the UN does not have True Democracy and also violate Human Rights. The UN does what it can to improve those situations, but what Kofi Annan did with the AP was totally self interest to please the Bush administration by entering non democratic and Human Rights violation into the AP, so that he can keep his job as the UN Secretary. He got his butt kicked by PapaD on that one, and deservingly too, no matter what mistakes PapaD may have made during the AP negotiations. At some point PapaD knew that Kofi had become "enemy" of Cypriots. Where is Kofi today.? He has no legacy to be remembered by. Cyprus was his last chance to have a great legacy, but he chose to sell his soul to the DEVIL. Good riddance to him.

So Annan inked the Cyprus Comprehensive Solution, thousands of experts from all over the world had nothing to with it? and you expect to be taken seriously

I see, so just because the leader of the GC's may have not wanted to negotiate a losing solution, the rest of those who voted OXI for the AP should be punished for doing the right thing. Perhaps if you did not take too much benefits at the expense of the GC's, then they might have said YES to the AP, despite what PapaD did or did not do during the negotiations. Do you not bear most of the responsibilities in the way that the GC's voted.?

If we were to follow your logic however, that if a leader does not perform well during negotiations, then everyone must be then responsible for that failure, will be like blaming all those who died on the Titanic just because the captain of the ship run the ship into the iceberg. Sorry, it does not wash with me of your logic what so ever.!

Was the representative elected by the people, was he not authorised to negotiate on their behalf? you seem to forget that both sides were demanding what they feel is right, I did notice any GCs fighting our corner, each fought their own and tried to get their own views accepted, obviously the GC viewpoint was not acceptable and ı think you will find the same will happen this time around, in which case the UN shoudl be prepared to take a final stand on this matte once and for all. I personally feel thats what will brew during the meeting of Erdoğan and Obama, they are aware the negotations have broken down and will see how they will clear the path for Turkey to continue on the EU journey. What the US wants the US gets and if it means giving ground on Cyprus I think it will happen.

Yes VP, even if the Cypriots themselves accept a flawed plan that includes Democratic and Human Rights violations, that the EU will NOT accept it, unlike what the UN might. The GC's have gotten great advantages by being in the EU, and if you don't recognise this simple fact, then ask Talat and Turkey.

Big Boys, Little Boys is irrelevant. Big Boys may be able to shout louder, but Little Boys can still stand their grounds, and they have done so. Kosovo is the prime example

Do you know what derrogrations are about? What advanatges have the GCs gotten in the EU aside from leverage over Turkey? Go on deluding yourself that you have clout in the EU but when the shit hits the fan its every member for itself and they will stamp all over you guys to get what will benefit them not you.

Both Switzerland and the USA are True Democracies and are different in how each one operates, and Cyprus can be different also, as long as Democratic and Human Rights of it's citizens are not violated, as they are not in those countries you have chosen as an example. You want to violate those rights by claiming is just a another shade of Democracy. Sorry, that will not work for you to get the EU to bend it's rules to accomodate 120,000 TC's, and shame on you for even thinking about it.

If not being in the EU is not a BIG deal, then why doesn't Talat ask for an agreed partition on land size to be negotiated which will result the north and Turkey not seeing the EU doors ever again.!

You yourself put forward a in your words democratic and human rights respecting plan which was another shade of democracy than that of Switzerland or Belgium, this doesnt make it any less democratic its just another version to suit the country in question. The only problem with your proposal was that it left us TCs wide open to manipulation and exploitation all that was needed was the loss of 1 seat in the upper house and the GCs would have what they always longed for total control and use reduced to just another minority in our own country.

As for asking for partition by reducing land size the GCs would never accept such a deal because the land size would not go below 29% to make the TRNC viable.

Sure it does. By having a "New Country" it also means having a new constitution, does it not.? By having a new constitution, it also means the whole thing is up for negotiations, which means there will not be any undemocratic and Human rights violations included as it was done so in the 1960 constitution. This comes with the BBF that it was negotiated, remember.! Obviously not everything needs to be changed, but certainly anything that one side does not want, or at the very least, come to somewhere in the middle. I have yet to see you come anywhere in the middle so far on all the Racist violations that was in the 1960 constitution. In fact, you wanted those violations to expanded as they were done with the AP, which you gave a resounding YES to it. Sorry, such violations will not be accepted by Democracy loving Cypriots for the future of our country of Cyprus as a EU member. I know old habits are hard to get rid off, but you need to do it anyway by refusing to accept anything that is non democratic and violation of Human Rights. I gave you a plan that resolved these issues, but that was too Democratic for you, therefore you have refused it. You cannot keep others land by force and accept to be good neighbours in the same country. Only a fool can have such expectations.

I have come very close to the middle by accepting a great of your proposals but the most important element that you have knowingly misguided people on is the risk TCs would face if the GCs decided to manipulate the situation into their favor, this tell us a great deal about your style of democracy and human rights, with GCs at the helm and the power to steer us where ever they wish we would be reduced to living in a GC state run by Gcs and discriminated against at every turn all the name of "democracy". Without a comprehensive solution the land issue will remain locked as it is part and parcel of the whole deal just as GCs hold hostage recognition.

There are no such things as "community rights". The next best thing is "minority rights" which is not what you want, therefore, the only option left for you, is to be an equal citizen with equal rights just like anyone else in any other True Democratic countries where you will have the same exact rights as anyone else. When you ask for more rights than others as a special group, then you can only ask for it as a "minority rights" and even then, those rights will not violate others Democratic and Human Rights. It just means you have extra protection for you as an individual based on what community you belong to, and only if and when you ask for those extra protections from the majority.

How will you achieve this? that is what all these negotaitons are about how will the new structure be guaranteed?

That's your choice to vote NO on a Democratic plan that does not violate anyone's Human Rights. It will then confirm what my cousin's husband said to me in Cyprus, that the TC's only voted for the AP and not for peace, because any plan that is close to the AP, cannot be possibly be for peace.

Thank you for acknowledging we have a right to say NO or YES to what we TCs feel is right or wrong. So this tells you that any new plan has to also satisfy our concerns and fears and could therefore be seen as GCs as undemocratic and against their human rights so still no deal. We will never give up on what we think is necessary is we were to unite and it appears any gains for TCs is a loss for GCs and vice versa so status quo appears to have avery stron foothold in Cyprus.

As far as I know, the TC's did not contest RoC entry into the EU when entry talks were on going, which one can interpret as accepting the entry of the RoC into the EU. You can once again thank Denktash for that blunder. It's too little too late now to continue to argue this point. Best thing to do now, is to resolve the political problems of Cyprus, so that all Cypriots can benefit from Cyprus's entry into the EU, which you too will be thankful for one day. This is not a negative for Cyprus, but a positive. If Cyprus did not enter into the EU, there even not have been a AP in 2004 or any negotiations today, as there were nothing in the previous 30+ years before 2004.

Tis issue can always be taken to court and contested..whether we would win or not is another matter. The EU perspective has brought absolutely nothing positive to the Cyprus problem imo it has complicated matters even further and the big boys will use you when they are good and ready to benefit from your dilemma.

"Virgin Birth" in the AP meant 2 different states which would have become 2 different independent states/countries within a very short time. Another good reason why the GC's said OXI to the AP.

The UN and EU said BBF but what do they know you probably know better than them

Well, sorry to remind you again, but the International community accepts the 1960 constitution being valid even though the TC "heart" as you put it, is missing from it. Life of anything can be maintained without a "heart" if other sources can be used to maintain life, and that's what has been happening with the 1960 constitution, right or wrong. I'm just telling you where we are and what it is, and the last 45 years is a testament to the above statement, because the TC's were partly responsible for refusing to participate by leaving their "heart" in the 1960 constitution, and the International community is well aware of these facts which are also the reasons as to why the north cannot and will not be recognised ever if the legal body in Cyprus does not agree for it to be recognised as a separate entity.

You can put it on life support but if the heart is not put back in place the Cyprus problem will leave the "RoC" with 37% missing for a long long time to come.

Answer me this one question if what you offer is so desirable why arent people rushing to grab hold of it? Why arent TCs rushing south? not all TCs are holding onto GC property. Even if they are they could hold onto that and enjoy the heaven you try to sell the TCs??? Kikapu you are a charlatan of the worst kind and have sold your soul to the devil, you would have no problems pushing TCs off a cliff and into a black hole of GC "democracy" exposing them to discrimation and exploitation, shame on you.

[wyoming cowboy]

The bottom line to the problem in Cyprus can best be described in these words...Hippocrates the ancient Greek doctor, once said, ".Most ailments can easily be cured but the patients refuse to take their medicine"..The Turkish Cypriots have to come to terms with a Federated Cyprus, which literally means one man one vote..The Greek cypriots have to give up on the idea of getting all their lands back ,compensation or exchange for whoever doesnt go back is the bitterness of the medicine. Like Talat said today this agony of the Cyprus problem will continue forever,with no solution. All laws and rights to be upheld to the standard of the European Union.

[wyoming cowboy]

Viewpoint you need to define "what" you want. In 1960 you people signed an agreement with the Greek cyps creating a Democratic Republic...as stated in the 1960 constitution.The minorities such as your people the Turkcyps AGREED to being a minority of 18 percent but received 30 percent in the congress, all human rights and moral rights were inalienable to your people...Noone could take away your human rights .You disagreed with Makarios and his 13 points which none of them violated any of your peoples rights and walked away. In 1977 Makarios and Denktash signed an agreement that based the solution of cyprus on a FEDERATED DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC,and now you want a confederation instead Your agreementsin 1960 and 1977 you walked away from both. Your people are in violation of violating one very serious agreement and one that would base the solution to the cyprus problem.

Do we alsohave the right to reject anything the EU and UN try to impose on us if we feel it is undemocratic and racist yet meets GC demands?

This is what you quoted. Please answer Kiks question about what racist or undemocratic demands we have made.

We feel being the ultimate words, the GCs seem to think that because they do not like what the EU and UN support eg the AP it is undemocratic and against their human rights. You people need to learn there are many shades of democracy as administered by different countries they vary according to the history and sociological structure of the country concerned. It is for this reason that we TCs will not give away our community rights to become just another minority under your GC admnistered "democracy" we are partners and want to be treated as such we demand an effective and guaranteed say in our own future.

Name me one federation or confederation where they demand ethnically clean constituent states.

Obviously you do not know what we demand, go study and come back in a few days.

[YFred]

The bottom line to the problem in Cyprus can best be described in these words...Hippocrates the ancient Greek doctor, once said, ".Most ailments can easily be cured but the patients refuse to take their medicine"..The Turkish Cypriots have to come to terms with a Federated Cyprus, which literally means one man one vote..The Greek cypriots have to give up on the idea of getting all their lands back ,compensation or exchange for whoever doesnt go back is the bitterness of the medicine. Like Talat said today this agony of the Cyprus problem will continue forever,with no solution. All laws and rights to be upheld to the standard of the European Union.

You are almost there WC. TCs will accept a federal structure one man one vote. The question is how? not to leave a door open for some crazy GCs to take control like last time.

Its a matter of percentage of land for the federal structure and how may GCs will come over the north. I strongly suspect that allocation allowed for the GCs to move to the north will not be taken up and will prefer compensation if the compensation level was current prices, you can't be fairer than that.

Then all the TCs will be calling for the TA to leave if they hadn't gone yet and I can go freely to Lurucina without having to show my ID card.

[wyoming cowboy]

A Federal Republic also means that the central government would have to be controlled by the Gc, total freedom of movement, no restrictions of Gc living in the Tc state

The bottom line to the problem in Cyprus can best be described in these words...Hippocrates the ancient Greek doctor, once said, ".Most ailments can easily be cured but the patients refuse to take their medicine"..The Turkish Cypriots have to come to terms with a Federated Cyprus, which literally means one man one vote..The Greek cypriots have to give up on the idea of getting all their lands back ,compensation or exchange for whoever doesnt go back is the bitterness of the medicine. Like Talat said today this agony of the Cyprus problem will continue forever,with no solution. All laws and rights to be upheld to the standard of the European Union.

You are almost there WC. TCs will accept a federal structure one man one vote. The question is how? not to leave a door open for some crazy GCs to take control like last time.

Its a matter of percentage of land for the federal structure and how may GCs will come over the north. I strongly suspect that allocation allowed for the GCs to move to the north will not be taken up and will prefer compensation if the compensation level was current prices, you can't be fairer than that.

Then all the TCs will be calling for the TA to leave if they hadn't gone yet and I can go freely to Lurucina without having to show my ID card.