Cyprus-Forum.com

[vaughanwilliams]

Oh please don't start discussing it in Greek with no translation.

I remember when all and sundry were accusing Paypal of operating illegally and threatening to report them to the FSA. Nothing came of it. They were allowed to do whatever it was they were set up to do.

I am reminded of this thread every time I am on the internet. HSBC ruthlessly advertise as a suitable bank for ex pats. I just don't see the point of this.

Perhaps if it were a competitor Bank who were taking them to task I might think they had researched, found precedents and had good grounds to do so. But not just Joe Soap taking umbrage about it.

It also occurs to me that it might fall under that 'strictly speaking it is 'illegal' but nothing will happen/no action will be taken' umbrella that covers other stuff (thinking of Visa Requirements here where TRNC is involved).

I also cannot see what satisfaction would be gained if by some miracle you stopped them operating over there. Plenty of other banks for people to choose from. (Or are you dreaming of an outcome where all the head honchos and employees of the Bank would be sent to prison and all the investors lose their money? Or what?)

But then I think the 'next step' brainwave to take GUESTS (not the travel agents, or the people who are making money from operating the hotels, but holidaymakers who are giving their money to them) who stay in hotels over there to court is potty too.

Gasman,

Malapapa and his side-kicks fancy themselves as some sort of Don Quixote types out to right wrongs and bring the culprits to justice. In fact they are mean minded people who have helped to keep the TRNC in the state it's in and are determined to make them pay for the humiliation they suffered in 1974 and since. That there are "peace" talks under way which could and should bring most things to a happy conclusion, deters them not at all. They are desperate to see TRNC fail before it has a chance to join the wider world.
Do not be deceived by them.

[Malapapa]

Given that South Africa now has one of the highest, if not THE highest, murder rate in the world and that the black government which took over after apartheid has singularly failed in improving the lot of most poor black South Africans, I would say that acts like the one against Barclays helped precipitate the country into the state it now finds itself in. So, yes, I would say it turned out NOT to be a worthy strategy as it has back-fired the country into its present state.

It's unsuprising that a professed racist would mourn the passing of Apartheid. I'm sure in your warped mind there's a rationale for why slavery ought also to be reinstated, to improve the lot of the black man.

vaughan, you really are an unworthy lowlife.

[vaughanwilliams]

Given that South Africa now has one of the highest, if not THE highest, murder rate in the world and that the black government which took over after apartheid has singularly failed in improving the lot of most poor black South Africans, I would say that acts like the one against Barclays helped precipitate the country into the state it now finds itself in. So, yes, I would say it turned out NOT to be a worthy strategy as it has back-fired the country into its present state.

It's unsuprising that a professed racist would mourn the passing of Apartheid. I'm sure in your warped mind there's a rationale for why slavery ought also to be reinstated, to improve the lot of the black man.

vaughan, you really are an unworthy lowlife.

Malapapa,

In pre-apartheid South Africa, white people and non-white people couldn't sit on the same park-bench, lie on the same beach, or travel on the same part of the bus, etc. Pretty small price to pay for living in the most prosperous, peaceful and least-corrupt country in Africa.
Since apartheid, you daren't sit on a park bench or the beach for fear of being mugged and/or murdered.
As for corruption, SA now vies with the likes of Zimbabwe for the title.

I'll leave you to decide if the black man swopped a bad system for a worse one.

[YFred]

Given that South Africa now has one of the highest, if not THE highest, murder rate in the world and that the black government which took over after apartheid has singularly failed in improving the lot of most poor black South Africans, I would say that acts like the one against Barclays helped precipitate the country into the state it now finds itself in. So, yes, I would say it turned out NOT to be a worthy strategy as it has back-fired the country into its present state.

It's unsuprising that a professed racist would mourn the passing of Apartheid. I'm sure in your warped mind there's a rationale for why slavery ought also to be reinstated, to improve the lot of the black man.

vaughan, you really are an unworthy lowlife.

Malapapa,

In pre-apartheid South Africa, white people and non-white people couldn't sit on the same park-bench, lie on the same beach, or travel on the same part of the bus, etc. Pretty small price to pay for living in the most prosperous, peaceful and least-corrupt country in Africa.
Since apartheid, you daren't sit on a park bench or the beach for fear of being mugged and/or murdered.
As for corruption, SA now vies with the likes of Zimbabwe for the title.

I'll leave you to decide if the black man swopped a bad system for a worse one.

VW you are wrong about SA. Yes things are not what they should be but that is because steps have not been taken to redistribute the wealth. It still in the hands of the few. Zimbabwe did it bit in a totally corrupt way so that has nor worked either.

[vaughanwilliams]

Given that South Africa now has one of the highest, if not THE highest, murder rate in the world and that the black government which took over after apartheid has singularly failed in improving the lot of most poor black South Africans, I would say that acts like the one against Barclays helped precipitate the country into the state it now finds itself in. So, yes, I would say it turned out NOT to be a worthy strategy as it has back-fired the country into its present state.

It's unsuprising that a professed racist would mourn the passing of Apartheid. I'm sure in your warped mind there's a rationale for why slavery ought also to be reinstated, to improve the lot of the black man.

vaughan, you really are an unworthy lowlife.

Malapapa,

In pre-apartheid South Africa, white people and non-white people couldn't sit on the same park-bench, lie on the same beach, or travel on the same part of the bus, etc. Pretty small price to pay for living in the most prosperous, peaceful and least-corrupt country in Africa.
Since apartheid, you daren't sit on a park bench or the beach for fear of being mugged and/or murdered.
As for corruption, SA now vies with the likes of Zimbabwe for the title.

I'll leave you to decide if the black man swopped a bad system for a worse one.

VW you are wrong about SA. Yes things are not what they should be but that is because steps have not been taken to redistribute the wealth. It still in the hands of the few. Zimbabwe did it bit in a totally corrupt way so that has nor worked either.

How am I wrong about SA? The black South Africans swopped an opressive (racist) white regime for an opressive (corrupt) black regime.
Net gain - nil (or less, when you consider crime there).

Zimbabwe took land from white farmers who knew how to manage it and gave it to their cronies, who managed to f*ck it up in short order. Net gain - inflation running in 10's of 1000's of %.

[YFred]

Given that South Africa now has one of the highest, if not THE highest, murder rate in the world and that the black government which took over after apartheid has singularly failed in improving the lot of most poor black South Africans, I would say that acts like the one against Barclays helped precipitate the country into the state it now finds itself in. So, yes, I would say it turned out NOT to be a worthy strategy as it has back-fired the country into its present state.

It's unsuprising that a professed racist would mourn the passing of Apartheid. I'm sure in your warped mind there's a rationale for why slavery ought also to be reinstated, to improve the lot of the black man.

vaughan, you really are an unworthy lowlife.

Malapapa,

In pre-apartheid South Africa, white people and non-white people couldn't sit on the same park-bench, lie on the same beach, or travel on the same part of the bus, etc. Pretty small price to pay for living in the most prosperous, peaceful and least-corrupt country in Africa.
Since apartheid, you daren't sit on a park bench or the beach for fear of being mugged and/or murdered.
As for corruption, SA now vies with the likes of Zimbabwe for the title.

I'll leave you to decide if the black man swopped a bad system for a worse one.

VW you are wrong about SA. Yes things are not what they should be but that is because steps have not been taken to redistribute the wealth. It still in the hands of the few. Zimbabwe did it bit in a totally corrupt way so that has nor worked either.

How am I wrong about SA? The black South Africans swopped an opressive (racist) white regime for an opressive (corrupt) black regime.
Net gain - nil (or less, when you consider crime there).

Zimbabwe took land from white farmers who knew how to manage it and gave it to their cronies, who managed to f*ck it up in short order. Net gain - inflation running in 10's of 1000's of %.

VW, SA did not redistribute the wealth just changed the government officials. What about all the land and mineral rights they took off Blacks and moved them on to deserts. That was never corrected.
With Zimbabwe, I agree with you. They just gave the land to their cronies, but even that would have worked if they just replaced the white farmers, but the cronies fired the black workers that actuall worked the land abd employed their own cronies whoknew nothing about the land. Of course they will end upin a mess. If done properly it would have worked. White man is still running the the whole of Africa but this time from the cities of eu. When you have refined coffee exported to the eu with 6000% tax, you begin to realise how things work in Africa.

[Gasman]

Here's someone who knows first hand about the situation in Zimbabwe, a long time internet pal of mine, Cathy Buckle. A very courageous lady. She writes 'A letter from Zimbabwe' and you can read all of them on her website. She has written books too.

http://www.cathybuckle.com/march2010.shtml

Back to Cyprus, we hear a lot about a 'solution', or a 'settlement', but the word 'Peace' doesn't seem to crop up very often. Surely what's needed is a lasting Peace.

[Malapapa]

Back to Cyprus, we hear a lot about a 'solution', or a 'settlement', but the word 'Peace' doesn't seem to crop up very often. Surely what's needed is a lasting Peace.

Indeed. And there can be no lasting peace without justice.

[Malapapa]

While the arguments about the relative merits of Turkey's new puppet in the north continue, a salutary reminder of the real issues at hand.

Here's a letter sent to my MP from the UK Minister for Europe....

Dear Malapapa's MP

Thank you for your letter dated 18 February 2010 to the Foreign Secretary on behalf of your constituent Malapapa, about the response he received from the FSA.

Let me reassure you there has been no change to the UK's long-standing policy of non recognition of northern Cyprus.

The FSA regrets any offence unintentionally caused to Malapapa by its incorrect use of terminology, which does not reflect any intention on its part to imply recognition of the "Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus".

The FSA was simply making the point to Malapapa that it is not accountable for the investment decisions of British registered companies nor does it have a mandate to operate in foreign jurisdictions. (Note by Malapapa: Not entirely sure what is meant by this, other than it's incorrect)

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office is unable to oversee every reference to Cyprus across government, but does endeavour to publicise the correct terminology for referring to the Island's occupied areas.

I hope this reassures Malapapa that the FSA's response was not an act of recognition, but a simple error by an individual who does not normally deal with Cyprus and could not reasonably be expected to be aware of the sensitivities of terminology involved.

Yours

Minister for Europe

[Malapapa]

Here's my letter to him sent on 22 April 2010...

Dear Minister

Thank you for the response to my MP, dated 29 March 2010 regarding the FSA's dealings with HSBC in relation to its operations in the occupied part of Cyprus.

I am not at all reassured by your words about 'non recognition' of northern Cyprus. Actions, or in this case, inactions, speak much louder. I doubt you would be so relaxed if we were talking about HSBC operating in Iran or North Korea.

This isn't an issue of inadvertently causing offense through incorrect use of terminology. It is about the FSA’s failure to properly supervise HSBC on a consolidated basis. Through typical inattention to detail, it is about the FSA treating (and thereby in effect recognising) the "TRNC" as a legitimate country, with a legitimate regulator, where a bank under the FSA’s consolidated supervision can somehow be doing legitimate business.

More than simply a long-standing policy, Britain's non-recognition of northern Cyprus is a legal obligation under the Treaty of Guarantee. This Treaty provides, inter alia, that the guarantors 'undertake to prohibit, as far as lies within their power, all activity having the object of promoting directly or indirectly either the union of the Republic of Cyprus with any other State, or the partition of the Island'.

HSBC, in operating in the "TRNC", is almost certainly flouting the regulatory regime of the Republic of Cyprus (an EU member state), and is almost certainly extending banking facilities to the perpetrators of crime.

The overwhelming majority of the property in the "TRNC" belongs to displaced Cypriots. The regime's economy has essentially consisted of illegally exploiting these properties. It is therefore inconceivable that HSBC, in operating in the "TRNC", has not been involved in financial crime arising from such exploitation.

By not taking action the FSA is therefore willfully turning a blind eye to financial crime. This is a clear breach of the FSA’s fifth statutory objective, which is 'the reduction of financial crime – reducing the extent to which it is possible for a business to be used for a purpose connected with financial crime'.

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/About/Aims/ ... ndex.shtml

Your response and that of the FSA are simply not good enough as they fail to address the substantive issues which have been raised. There is a case to answer. It is not being answered.

If, as Minister for Europe, you took the UK's treaty obligations to Cyprus seriously, you would have reassured me with actions, not words.

Yours sincerely

Malapapa


The Minister responded soon after by email to say that he is not an expert on the FSA and its powers but would look at the matter again if (and let's be honest, it's a big IF) a Labour government is returned.