Cyprus-Forum.com

[zan]

The only right the carpetbaggers have are to claim they have been swindled by those that sold them land to which they had no title. No more than that.

I doubt that’ll save them from liability…

But still you will not get an inch of land back...Funny that!!!!!

It's still ours. It will always be ours. De jure and soon de facto!

You will have to get used to saying that without your dentures in!!!!

If you're de jure good, I'll give you some basic Oral Microbiology tips which if you follow, like myself, you will never suffer from plaque, tartar, cavities, gum disease, abscesses and retain de facto all your own teeth, without a spot of decay!

Now you are getting the Nostadamus way of hedging your bets in your use of words...

One of he side effects of my illness is that I produce too much calcium and have teeth like iron!!!!!!

Take care your skull doesn't fill up with calcium and leave no room for your "brain" ....

My brain, like my teeth...Will be preserved for ever.....

Gotta go....

[james_mav]

The Lisbon Treaty has finally been ratified by the Czech Republic, and will come into force in a few weeks.

Czech president signs Lisbon treaty

By Jan Cienski in Prague

Published: November 3 2009 08:37 | Last updated: November 3 2009 16:21

Vaclav Klaus, Czech president, signed the Lisbon treaty on Tuesday, ending a year-long stalemate with his fellow EU leaders and enabling the treaty to come into force as the EU’s new governing framework.

Mr Klaus, a eurosceptic who has compared the EU to the former Soviet Union, fought a dogged resistance to the treaty, only throwing in the towel after the Czech constitutional court ruled earlier on Tuesday that the treaty did not violate the Czech constitution.

The court was the last hurdle to getting Mr Klaus to sign the treaty, which had been approved by the Czech parliament last year.

Refusing to give in quietly, Mr Klaus called the court judgement “biased” and complained that “the Czech Republic will stop being a sovereign state”, before announcing he had signed the treaty at 3pm.

Mr Klaus and his supporters had opposed the treaty fearing it would lead to closer European integration and give too much power to Brussels.

The Czech president put up obstacle after obstacle before finally capitulating. Initially, he said he would not sign until after the second Irish referendum. Then he said he could not sign while the court was considering the legality of the treaty in a case filed by a rebel group of conservative senators.

In a final bid to slow ratification, Mr Klaus said Lisbon could open the door to land claims by the heirs of millions of ethnic Germans expelled from Czechoslovakia after the war.

That objection was dealt with during last week’s EU summit, where EU leaders agreed to give the Czech Republic an opt out from the treaty’s charter of fundamental rights.

There was never much doubt about the constitutional court’s final verdict, as it had dealt with a similar case last year and had ruled then that Lisbon did not violate the Czech constitution.

Although raising the possibility of German land claims, an emotive issue, generated public support, Mr Klaus’s wider stance on the treaty was not backed a majority of Czechs. Opinion polls showed most Czechs wanted their president to sign and worried that his continued resistance was harming their country’s standing in the EU.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ac421a94-c850-11de-a69e-00144feabdc0.html

[YFred]

The Lisbon Treaty has finally been ratified by the Czech Republic, and will come into force in a few weeks.

Czech president signs Lisbon treaty

By Jan Cienski in Prague

Published: November 3 2009 08:37 | Last updated: November 3 2009 16:21

Vaclav Klaus, Czech president, signed the Lisbon treaty on Tuesday, ending a year-long stalemate with his fellow EU leaders and enabling the treaty to come into force as the EU’s new governing framework.

Mr Klaus, a eurosceptic who has compared the EU to the former Soviet Union, fought a dogged resistance to the treaty, only throwing in the towel after the Czech constitutional court ruled earlier on Tuesday that the treaty did not violate the Czech constitution.

The court was the last hurdle to getting Mr Klaus to sign the treaty, which had been approved by the Czech parliament last year.

Refusing to give in quietly, Mr Klaus called the court judgement “biased” and complained that “the Czech Republic will stop being a sovereign state”, before announcing he had signed the treaty at 3pm.

Mr Klaus and his supporters had opposed the treaty fearing it would lead to closer European integration and give too much power to Brussels.

The Czech president put up obstacle after obstacle before finally capitulating. Initially, he said he would not sign until after the second Irish referendum. Then he said he could not sign while the court was considering the legality of the treaty in a case filed by a rebel group of conservative senators.

In a final bid to slow ratification, Mr Klaus said Lisbon could open the door to land claims by the heirs of millions of ethnic Germans expelled from Czechoslovakia after the war.

That objection was dealt with during last week’s EU summit, where EU leaders agreed to give the Czech Republic an opt out from the treaty’s charter of fundamental rights.

There was never much doubt about the constitutional court’s final verdict, as it had dealt with a similar case last year and had ruled then that Lisbon did not violate the Czech constitution.

Although raising the possibility of German land claims, an emotive issue, generated public support, Mr Klaus’s wider stance on the treaty was not backed a majority of Czechs. Opinion polls showed most Czechs wanted their president to sign and worried that his continued resistance was harming their country’s standing in the EU.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ac421a94-c850-11de-a69e-00144feabdc0.html

The most intersting aspect of this is the concession the Czechs managed ot extract from the EU as an opt out.

[james_mav]

The most intersting aspect of this is the concession the Czechs managed ot extract from the EU as an opt out.

Do you find it interesting purely from an intellectual perspective, or from the perspective of the restitution owed to refugees from the occupied north of Cyprus being denied them? If the latter, allow me to put your mind at rest: the opt-out was given with the unanimous approval of EU member states, in particular the German government, who represents the majority of any potential claimants. Such an accommodation would never be granted by by the governments of Greece or the Republic of Cyprus. This "opt-out" in no way forms any kind of legal precedent.

Furthermore, the circumstances of the expulsion of Germans from Czechoslovakia are vastly different to the ethnic cleansing of occupied northern Cyprus. The expulsion was legitimised by the Potsdam agreement, and significant compensation was paid to the expelled population by the German government in lieu of war reparations to Czechoslovakia.

I refer you to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expulsion_of_Germans_from_Czechoslovakia

and

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potsdam_conference

[YFred]

The most intersting aspect of this is the concession the Czechs managed ot extract from the EU as an opt out.

Do you find it interesting purely from an intellectual perspective, or from the perspective of the restitution owed to refugees from the occupied north of Cyprus being denied them? If the latter, allow me to put your mind at rest: the opt-out was given with the unanimous approval of EU member states, in particular the German government, who represents the majority of any potential claimants. Such an accommodation would never be granted by by the governments of Greece or the Republic of Cyprus. This "opt-out" in no way forms any kind of legal precedent.

Furthermore, the circumstances of the expulsion of Germans from Czechoslovakia are vastly different to the ethnic cleansing of occupied northern Cyprus. The expulsion was legitimised by the Potsdam agreement, and significant compensation was paid to the expelled population by the German government in lieu of war reparations to Czechoslovakia.

I refer you to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expulsion_of_Germans_from_Czechoslovakia

and

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potsdam_conference

It goes to show that the German government is mature enough to realise her past mistakes and correct it and move on. The ultimate responsibility for the Cyprus Problem goes back to the first Makarios government and the first meeting they had in starting the destruction of the RoC by violent means and beginning to formulate the Akritas plan. Has Greece or RoC reached such maturity, I think not. We have some time to go yet. But they will be dragged into the 21st Century, screaming and shouting like a spoiled child who has just lost some sweets, whether they like it or not.

[james_mav]

It goes to show that the German government is mature enough to realise her past mistakes and correct it and move on. The ultimate responsibility for the Cyprus Problem goes back to the first Makarios government and the first meeting they had in starting the destruction of the RoC by violent means and beginning to formulate the Akritas plan. Has Greece or RoC reached such maturity, I think not. We have some time to go yet. But they will be dragged into the 21st Century, screaming and shouting like a spoiled child who has just lost some sweets, whether they like it or not.

It actually goes to show that the German government is acknowledging that the issue has been settled in lieu of war reparations to Czechoslovakia.

It also goes to show that in the case of an EU member, giving a member a supposed "opt-out" was far easier and less costly than throwing them out of the union for the sake of getting the Lisbon Treaty up. The idea that the EU needs any new members so desperately that it will be willing to agree to any actual contentious opt-outs is lunacy.

Don't forget that at its heart and before it evolved to also become a political union, the EU was an economic union founded on the harmonisation of civil laws (i.e. the laws of property, contracts, trade, etc) - the idea being to encourage the economic interconnectedness of EU members and hence discourage future armed conflicts. The idea of extinguishing legitimate economic interests is completely anathema to the EU, and there is probably no EU legal mechanism by which this could be achieved vis-a-vis the property situation in the occupied north, i.e. even if the political leadership wanted to extinguish the property rights of those ethnically cleansed from the occupied north, they could not do so without undermining the legal underpinnings of the EU (or kicking the RoC out of the EU).

As for the political maturity of Greece and the RoC - for sure by "western" standards (for some people's definition of the term) they have not reached the levels of some EU members, but then again Sweden for example, has not had to contend with the curse of geography and history that say Greece has had to contend with. And anyway, thanks to the EU enlargements of 2004 and 2007, Greece and the RoC are doing quite well in terms of political and economic maturity as compared to some of the newer members, to say nothing of the current crop of aspiring members: the EU is hardly likely to welcome with opt-outs and open arms the political equivalent of at best a dishonest used-car salesman, and at worst a insecure, violent, racist, duplicitous, hypocritical, and unstable regime that frequently acts as if it is in its ottoman heyday.

[Jerry]

I think it is time for the EU to tell Turkey that its colonisation of Cyprus is jeopardising that country's membership bid and that Turkish illegalities in the north must be reversed. Turkey is playing a waiting game; it believes that the illegal re-population of the north will, one day, be accepted as legitimate.

The EU should publicly spell out the implications of the Lisbon Treaty to Turkey, especially with regard to its colonisation of an EU member.

[Piratis]

Actually YFred, what happened in Czechoslovakia sets a president for the removal of the Turkish minority from Cyprus.

Hitler invaded and occupied Czechoslovakia with the pretext of protecting the German minority. Just like Turkey did in the case of Cyprus. Of course the lame excuse of Hitler was not accepted, just like the lame excuse of Turks is not accepted, which is why the pseudo state you declared on our land is not recognized.

When the balance of power changed and Czechoslovakia was liberated, the German minority was removed from Czechoslovakia so the Germans would not be able to use this minority again as an excuse to invade Czechoslovakia. The same can happen to Cyprus. The Cypriot people have suffered enough from the Turks already.

We are making every effort to live along with your minority in peace, in a democracy - one person one vote, without racist discriminations and with the human rights of every citizen respected.

Unfortunately you support "solutions" based on ethnic cleansing and the human rights violations of innocent people. So don't be surprised when this turns against you and you are forced to accept such kind of "solution" but in reverse.

[YFred]

It goes to show that the German government is mature enough to realise her past mistakes and correct it and move on. The ultimate responsibility for the Cyprus Problem goes back to the first Makarios government and the first meeting they had in starting the destruction of the RoC by violent means and beginning to formulate the Akritas plan. Has Greece or RoC reached such maturity, I think not. We have some time to go yet. But they will be dragged into the 21st Century, screaming and shouting like a spoiled child who has just lost some sweets, whether they like it or not.

It actually goes to show that the German government is acknowledging that the issue has been settled in lieu of war reparations to Czechoslovakia.

It also goes to show that in the case of an EU member, giving a member a supposed "opt-out" was far easier and less costly than throwing them out of the union for the sake of getting the Lisbon Treaty up. The idea that the EU needs any new members so desperately that it will be willing to agree to any actual contentious opt-outs is lunacy.

Don't forget that at its heart and before it evolved to also become a political union, the EU was an economic union founded on the harmonisation of civil laws (i.e. the laws of property, contracts, trade, etc) - the idea being to encourage the economic interconnectedness of EU members and hence discourage future armed conflicts. The idea of extinguishing legitimate economic interests is completely anathema to the EU, and there is probably no EU legal mechanism by which this could be achieved vis-a-vis the property situation in the occupied north, i.e. even if the political leadership wanted to extinguish the property rights of those ethnically cleansed from the occupied north, they could not do so without undermining the legal underpinnings of the EU (or kicking the RoC out of the EU).

As for the political maturity of Greece and the RoC - for sure by "western" standards (for some people's definition of the term) they have not reached the levels of some EU members, but then again Sweden for example, has not had to contend with the curse of geography and history that say Greece has had to contend with. And anyway, thanks to the EU enlargements of 2004 and 2007, Greece and the RoC are doing quite well in terms of political and economic maturity as compared to some of the newer members, to say nothing of the current crop of aspiring members: the EU is hardly likely to welcome with opt-outs and open arms the political equivalent of at best a dishonest used-car salesman, and at worst a insecure, violent, racist, duplicitous, hypocritical, and unstable regime that frequently acts as if it is in its ottoman heyday.

Yes very interesting. However I do not recognise this "dishonest used-car salesman, and at worst an insecure, violent, racist, duplicitous, hypocritical, and unstable regime" that you mention. All I see is a poor nation being suffocated by the more powerful nation and surviving despite all.
This nation will survive with you or without you, one way or another and when your children are ready to discuss peace, and then our children may choose to talk or may tell your children to get lost. That will be their prerogative. Kindly remind you next generation of the two possibilities for their future and they may just have to survive without us.

[YFred]

Actually YFred, what happened in Czechoslovakia sets a president for the removal of the Turkish minority from Cyprus.

Hitler invaded and occupied Czechoslovakia with the pretext of protecting the German minority. Just like Turkey did in the case of Cyprus. Of course the lame excuse of Hitler was not accepted, just like the lame excuse of Turks is not accepted, which is why the pseudo state you declared on our land is not recognized.

When the balance of power changed and Czechoslovakia was liberated, the German minority was removed from Czechoslovakia so the Germans would not be able to use this minority again as an excuse to invade Czechoslovakia. The same can happen to Cyprus. The Cypriot people have suffered enough from the Turks already.

We are making every effort to live along with your minority in peace, in a democracy - one person one vote, without racist discriminations and with the human rights of every citizen respected.

Unfortunately you support "solutions" based on ethnic cleansing and the human rights violations of innocent people. So don't be surprised when this turns against you and you are forced to accept such kind of "solution" but in reverse.

No Piratis, look carefully to what the Czechs opt out is. Stop dreaming.