Cyprus-Forum.com

[Talisker]

I am a Scot living in England. Do I expect special privileges for my minority status? NO!

As a scot you get to vote exclusively for your own assmebly AND you get an equal say as an indivdual in voting for the British parliament, lead currently by a scot a believe ?

An english person gets only to vote in the British parliament. They have no voice or say in the scottish one, no seperate english one and an equal say to you as an indivudal in the British one.

Some might see this as 'special priveldge' over an english british citizen.

Imagine if the english wanted to impose something that only they supported and they only supported it it because they were english rather than scottish and the scotts universaly opposed it and opposed it because they were scottish and not english.

Do you think such a thing could be fairly considered the valid will of a UNITARY British people. Should the english alone have the right to impose anything on the scots in the name of a unitary BRITISH people? Even if they act not for a unitary desire spread amongst all british people but act in a way that only english british people want yet these english people demand it be applied to the scots with 0 support from scots as well in the name of a UNITARY BRITISH people ?

Oh, Gawd... the Cypriot West Lothian question.

Scots historically come from a place called Scot-land.

TCs historically come from a place called Cyprus (not a place recently carved out of Cyprus by force called "TC-land")

TCs-to-Cypriots is not akin to Scots-to-Brits.

A far better analogy is African Americans-to-Americans.

In the 1960s there was segregation and discrimination against African Americans. Today Obama is president.

Quite! And TCs should take inspiration from that.......

[erolz3]

Talisker you still have no answerd my question.

Do you believe that 'ethnic' english, have the right to impose something that only they want , and the reason only they want it is because they see themselves as 'different' from non 'ethnic british' people on people they define as 'not ethnic english' against this other group that universaly opposes it, all as a valid and legitimate expression of the will of a UNITARY BRITISH people to determine their own future ?

[Malapapa]

Talisker you still have no answerd my question.

Do you believe that 'ethnic' english, have the right to impose something that only they want , and the reason only they want it is because they see themselves as 'different' from non 'ethnic british' people on people they define as 'not ethnic english' against this other group that universaly opposes it, all as a valid and legitimate expression of the will of a UNITARY BRITISH people to determine their own future ?

And then erolz disappeared in a puff of smoke....

[Talisker]

Talisker you still have no answerd my question.

Do you believe that 'ethnic' english, have the right to impose something that only they want , and the reason only they want it is because they see themselves as 'different' from non 'ethnic british' people on people they define as 'not ethnic english' against this other group that universaly opposes it, all as a valid and legitimate expression of the will of a UNITARY BRITISH people to determine their own future ?

I believe you are misrepresenting the case I was making. However, I'm happy to engage with your riddles.

Yes, of course, if the democratically elected UK government, voted for by the UK people (of all ethnic types), makes a policy decision which it considers to be for the good of the UK people (despite the fact it may be against the overall will of one or more of the minority UK ethnic groups) then that government has the right to take that decision (such a decision might be one that sees soldiers engaged in action in Afghanistan at the present moment, one I do not agree with, one which UK muslims would not agree with, one which I suspect most Scots would not agree with, and yet a higher than representative proportion of the fighting soldiers will be Scots). The Blair government was elected in 1997 with a manifesto which included devolution for Scotland and Wales, recognising the historical case for partial self-government of those nations. I repeat for you (as you chose to ignore it in my previous response), this was not for nations and ethnic populations that had declared their self-existence based on seizure of land from the majority ethnic population, as is the case for the TRNC.

I take it you believe TCs 'deserve' special privileges?

[erolz3]

However, I'm happy to engage with your riddles.

I do not think you will answer my question and certainly from my perspective your 'engagment' with it thus far is no answer and I am not going to keep trying.

I take it you believe TCs 'deserve' special privileges?

Not at all. I believe that as far as GC act in way that are consistent with GC and TC being a part of a unitary cypriot people then there is no issue at all for me.

However as far as GC chose to act in ways that divides and seperates us as a unitary people we have the the SAME and EQUAL rights as a people that they act and define us as seperate from.

So no 'special priviliedges' as far as I am concerned.

[Get Real!]

However as far as GC chose to act in ways that divides and seperates us as a unitary people we have the the SAME and EQUAL rights as a people that they act and define us as seperate from.

[B25]

However as far as GC chose to act in ways that divides and seperates us as a unitary people we have the the SAME and EQUAL rights as a people that they act and define us as seperate from.

He can't he just like to talk gobbledigook in the hope it makes him sound important and win brownie points from his TCs.

All his posts are just trash and word play. They guy cannot even answer a yes/no reply without a ar and peace response. Sorry Elroz, but you just overplay it.

[erolz3]

However as far as GC chose to act in ways that divides and seperates us as a unitary people we have the the SAME and EQUAL rights as a people that they act and define us as seperate from.

It really is not that difficult a concept and I have been saying it in one form or another here for 7 years or so.

If the way you act, what you want, is defined entirely by how your are different from me ethnicaly as a 'fellow' cypriot then please stop telling me that such is a valid expression of a unitary cypriot people.

If to you the very thing that you think defines you as a cypriot is something that also excludes me as a cypriot then please stop telling me such is a valid expression of a unitary cypriot people than includes both of us.

If the very thing you want and believe, by you wanting it and believing it, divides us totaly as Cypriots between GC and TC and for no other reason than because we are TC and different from you as GC then please do not tell me that this is an valid expression of a unitary cypriot people.

Really these are not very difficult ideas to understand. I can appreciate why you reject them as ideas, but to claim you can not even understand them as ideas is mystifying to me to say the least. They are not particularly obtuse,obsure of sophisticated as far as I can see ?

[boomerang]

here is a spanner in the works...how about a government banning the burka either via a ref or a government decision erol?...

[erolz3]

here is a spanner in the works...how about a government banning the burka either via a ref or a government decision erol?...

I personaly totaly object to the idea of the state doing such by any means and totaly independant of any arguments about religious freedom either. To me it is not the states business to regulate what I,or anyone else, can and can not wear. Dont care if its a burka, hoodie, mankini or a full rubber suit, its none of the states business in my humble opinion.