Cyprus-Forum.com

[denizaksulu]

What i believe is Cyprus problem did not started from the properties problem.

It bloody well did when in 1570 you had ZERO land and came and stole it all off the indigenous Cypriots and called it "Evkaf"!

Well fancy that... why didn't you call it Baclava land instead?

Ok, clever dick. Show me your pre-1571 Kochans and the whole of Cyprus is yours.

[Get Real!]

What i believe is Cyprus problem did not started from the properties problem.

It bloody well did when in 1570 you had ZERO land and came and stole it all off the indigenous Cypriots and called it "Evkaf"!

Well fancy that... why didn't you call it Baclava land instead?

Ok, clever dick. Show me your pre-1571 Kochans and the whole of Cyprus is yours.

As I said earlier, we didn't call them "Kochans" back then... this must be a Turkish word.

[denizaksulu]

What i believe is Cyprus problem did not started from the properties problem.

It bloody well did when in 1570 you had ZERO land and came and stole it all off the indigenous Cypriots and called it "Evkaf"!

Well fancy that... why didn't you call it Baclava land instead?

Ok, clever dick. Show me your pre-1571 Kochans and the whole of Cyprus is yours.

As I said earlier, we didn't call them "Kochans" back then... this must be a Turkish word.

Ok. Kochani then.

[Get Real!]

What i believe is Cyprus problem did not started from the properties problem.

It bloody well did when in 1570 you had ZERO land and came and stole it all off the indigenous Cypriots and called it "Evkaf"!

Well fancy that... why didn't you call it Baclava land instead?

Ok, clever dick. Show me your pre-1571 Kochans and the whole of Cyprus is yours.

As I said earlier, we didn't call them "Kochans" back then... this must be a Turkish word.

Ok. Kochani then.

That's the GC adaptation of the Turkish word...

[denizaksulu]

What i believe is Cyprus problem did not started from the properties problem.

It bloody well did when in 1570 you had ZERO land and came and stole it all off the indigenous Cypriots and called it "Evkaf"!

Well fancy that... why didn't you call it Baclava land instead?

Ok, clever dick. Show me your pre-1571 Kochans and the whole of Cyprus is yours.

As I said earlier, we didn't call them "Kochans" back then... this must be a Turkish word.

Ok. Kochani then.

That's the GC adaptation of the Turkish word...

Whats up GR. You are very subdued tonight.?

[Nikitas]

"Ok, clever dick. Show me your pre-1571 Kochans and the whole of Cyprus is yours."

Perhaps back then it was not necessary to show a Kochan to prove your right to land. Different culture, different ways of doing business.

But now that we have Kochans, if we show them, do we get our lands? Or is this Kochan lark another one of those Turkish ploys, to be used whenever it suits the situation at hand? As I recall all KOchans were abolished in one stroke under the "consitution" of the TRNC and all GC land "nationalised" an act which does not show much respect for Kochans.

[EPSILON]

[quote="Nikitas"]"Ok, clever dick. Show me your pre-1571 Kochans and the whole of Cyprus is yours."

Perhaps back then it was not necessary to show a Kochan to prove your right to land. Different culture, different ways of doing business.

But now that we have Kochans, if we show them, do we get our lands? Or is this Kochan lark another one of those Turkish ploys, to be used whenever it suits the situation at hand? As I recall all KOchans were abolished in one stroke under the "consitution" of the TRNC and all GC land "nationalised" an act which does not show much .
My friend-stop fighting with Ottomans. They are still have the powrer!!when they loose it they will understrand. is subject of 6hrs. Turks are mountain people they know better than us to run away-FAST-

[denizaksulu]

"Ok, clever dick. Show me your pre-1571 Kochans and the whole of Cyprus is yours."

Perhaps back then it was not necessary to show a Kochan to prove your right to land. Different culture, different ways of doing business.

But now that we have Kochans, if we show them, do we get our lands? Or is this Kochan lark another one of those Turkish ploys, to be used whenever it suits the situation at hand? As I recall all KOchans were abolished in one stroke under the "consitution" of the TRNC and all GC land "nationalised" an act which does not show much respect for Kochans.

Absolutely right. You hve the Kochans, you own the property. Whether you are TC or GC. No one should have a problem with that, unless of course you are a partitionist, which I am NOT.

The point I was making, was that in those days, whether we likedit or not, the conquerer owned everything. What a great survivor was the Greek Orthodox church. Naturally when the Ottomans conquered Cyprus from the Venetians, The rulers properties reverted to the new ruling powers. This was the way it was in those days. Considering how 'bad' the Ottomas were, the Greek Cypriot population did very well (vis a vis property), dont you agree. Dont blame the TC's forall this, they did not exist then.

[denizaksulu]

"Ok, clever dick. Show me your pre-1571 Kochans and the whole of Cyprus is yours."

Perhaps back then it was not necessary to show a Kochan to prove your right to land. Different culture, different ways of doing business.

But now that we have Kochans, if we show them, do we get our lands? Or is this Kochan lark another one of those Turkish ploys, to be used whenever it suits the situation at hand? As I recall all KOchans were abolished in one stroke under the "consitution" of the TRNC and all GC land "nationalised" an act which does not show much .
My friend-stop fighting with Ottomans. They are still have the powrer!!when they loose it they will understrand. is subject of 6hrs. Turks are mountain people they know better than us to run away-FAST-

I do not and never have supported the ensuing 'ethnic cleansing' of the Greek Cypriots from their properties. I believe that the properties are either restored to their legal owners or some kind of restitution be made.

[EPSILON]

"Ok, clever dick. Show me your pre-1571 Kochans and the whole of Cyprus is yours."

Perhaps back then it was not necessary to show a Kochan to prove your right to land. Different culture, different ways of doing business.

But now that we have Kochans, if we show them, do we get our lands? Or is this Kochan lark another one of those Turkish ploys, to be used whenever it suits the situation at hand? As I recall all KOchans were abolished in one stroke under the "consitution" of the TRNC and all GC land "nationalised" an act which does not show much respect for Kochans.

Absolutely right. You hve the Kochans, you own the property. Whether you are TC or GC. No one should have a problem with that, unless of course you are a partitionist, which I am NOT.

The point I was making, was that in those days, whether we likedit or not, the conquerer owned everything. What a great survivor was the Greek Orthodox church. Naturally when the Ottomans conquered Cyprus from the Venetians, The rulers properties reverted to the new ruling powers. This was the way it was in those days. Considering how 'bad' the Ottomas were, the Greek Cypriot population did very well (vis a vis property), dont you agree. Dont blame the TC's forall this, they did not exist then.

Our great thanks for the civilization, culture and Humanity, Ottomans / Turks and other animals brought us in Cyprus. We will be greatefull to you until we "CAN" sent you out of the Island.