The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content


Guarantees - a suggestion...

How can we solve it? (keep it civilized)

Postby Kikapu » Mon Mar 08, 2010 7:04 am

YFred wrote:
Viewpoint wrote:Your trick was to camaflouge the dangers TCs would face if they were foolish enough to adopt Kikapus capitulation plan. So basically you tried to sell us out.

VP, Kickapu is more decent then that. He was not selling us, he was giving us away. What was his reccomendation? 5% for the TRNC? Yeah right.


:lol: :lol: :lol:

Oh dear ol dear. We got the classic case of Blind leading the Blind here.! :lol:
User avatar
Kikapu
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 18050
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 6:18 pm

Postby wyoming cowboy » Mon Mar 08, 2010 10:28 am

Thats right The Tc and Gc will have to capitulate what they have now and feel secure with, in order to unite the island, Kikapus plan is appropriate to solve the problem in Cyprus....Again the Rule of Law will be the guarantor for both constituent states....
Viewpoint wrote:Kikapus plan equals TC capitulation
User avatar
wyoming cowboy
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1756
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 2:15 am

Postby wyoming cowboy » Mon Mar 08, 2010 10:41 am

YFred wrote:
wyoming cowboy wrote:
Viewpoint wrote:
Kikapu wrote:
Viewpoint wrote:guAratees are a deterrant and will ensure both sides to the agreement.


Unfortunately, Turkey has a bad record of being a guarantor, therefore she can't be trusted to do the right thing. The same goes to Greece and Britain. Using the past experience of guarantors, say Turkey's for instance, it will embolden the fascists and the NeoPartitionists from the north to cause trouble just to invite Turkey to come and divide the island again, except this time, the state lines would have been already drawn in a BBF agreement, and a member of the EU, the north can then declare to become an independent state. So in short, guarantorship is not a deterrent, but an invitation to divide the island, trouble caused by the Fascist NeoPartitionist. That is the reason why the GCs will not agree to Turkeys guardianship, because Turkey was supposed to be a guarantor to all Cypriots, but turns out, they only been a guarantor to occupying north of the island in the name of the TCs, or more commonly known today as the "Turks of Cyprus". Sorry VP, but you are not going to convince the GCs to accept Turkey after all she done in Cyprus, and all that she did not do, that she should have done. All the Fascist NeoPartitionists can't wait to have the GCs agree for Turkey to be a guarantor so that they can go and blow up their own kids schools and put the blame on the Gcs, just to invite Turkey to come in. That game has already been played and everyone can see right through the Fascist NeoPartitionist.


So do you think we will just give in to this demand and leave ourselves exposed, noway with no TA element in a solution you can forget it we would rather stay as we are, yet again you show how little you know the TCs.
There is no way a United Cyprus should have any guarantors, the only guarantor will be the rule of law, The Tc or cyprus turks or tc cyprus turks or what ever they call themselves, Under the umbrella of a Federal and state system both communities will adhere to the rule of law since it is in their best interest.....The Tc wanting Turkey as a guarantor power only shows their lack of faith with any system in Cyprus, they would rather have a fascist invading army protecting them, and would rather give up their freedoms for the illusion of security, in the end whoever gives up their freedoms for security will usually get neither.

So how will this rule of law be implemented differently from 1963. There was rule of law then too, but got ignored by the majority. You see we had system that actually worked and protected TC interests against what you call true democracy and I call 5 year dictatorship. Yo cannot get away from the fact that a so called normal 5 year majority dictatorial democracy aint viable here. Get over it. When TCs have complete confidence in the intentions of the GCs perhaps then you can persuade them to do otherwise, but what would be the point. You never live without an insurance policy and the TCs will never give up theirs. It really cannot be any easier to understand.
Are you asking me how the Tc constituent state will govern itself? They will have their own laws and jurisdictions, they will have their own constitution, their own police force, in a federal system, if petroleum is found on the northern shores of Cyprus the Tc constituent state making a deal with Exxon will keep the procedes to the petroleum, while probably paying an income tax to the federal government, The Federal government will have a unitary tax policy for its citizens, so they can fund the post office, monitor the ports and airports, and a federal police force that will be the only police force able to go into both constituent states,the police force of one state cannot go into another....Ive asked you before give me a scenario that you think could come up that would jeopordize Tc security ? and you havent yet....As a matter of fact the Annan Plan that you approved of in 04 was a federal plan just like kikapu outlined and iam trying to explain here, what?
User avatar
wyoming cowboy
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1756
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 2:15 am

Postby YFred » Mon Mar 08, 2010 11:33 am

Kikapu wrote:
YFred wrote:
Viewpoint wrote:Your trick was to camaflouge the dangers TCs would face if they were foolish enough to adopt Kikapus capitulation plan. So basically you tried to sell us out.

VP, Kickapu is more decent then that. He was not selling us, he was giving us away. What was his reccomendation? 5% for the TRNC? Yeah right.


:lol: :lol: :lol:

Oh dear ol dear. We got the classic case of Blind leading the Blind here.! :lol:

Hi seeeeeeeeeee, said the blind man, What?
User avatar
YFred
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 12100
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 1:22 am
Location: Lurucina-Upon-Thames

Postby wyoming cowboy » Mon Mar 08, 2010 7:12 pm

how does it do that explain yourself, if you know how to...
Viewpoint wrote:Kikapus plan equals TC capitulation
User avatar
wyoming cowboy
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1756
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 2:15 am

Postby Kikapu » Tue Mar 09, 2010 1:48 pm

wyoming cowboy wrote:how does it do that explain yourself, if you know how to...
Viewpoint wrote:Kikapus plan equals TC capitulation


WC, for VP and all the other NeoPartitionist, anything that has to do with True Democracy, Human Rights, International Laws, EU Principles and Rule of Law are considered to be a "capitulation" by them to the GCs. Any other excuse given by them are pure rubbish/garbage.!
User avatar
Kikapu
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 18050
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 6:18 pm

Postby YFred » Tue Mar 09, 2010 3:06 pm

Kikapu wrote:
wyoming cowboy wrote:how does it do that explain yourself, if you know how to...
Viewpoint wrote:Kikapus plan equals TC capitulation


WC, for VP and all the other NeoPartitionist, anything that has to do with True Democracy, Human Rights, International Laws, EU Principles and Rule of Law are considered to be a "capitulation" by them to the GCs. Any other excuse given by them are pure rubbish/garbage.!

What is really amazing is that all your GC friends are actually Neopartitionists and you just pretend that they are not. Does it not worry you that perhaps Bananiot considers them as Neopartitionists in disguise?
Do you not realise that they are late converts to your ideas and that their intentions may be different? Do you value his judgement at all?
User avatar
YFred
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 12100
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 1:22 am
Location: Lurucina-Upon-Thames

Postby DT. » Tue Mar 09, 2010 3:40 pm

YFred wrote:
Kikapu wrote:
wyoming cowboy wrote:how does it do that explain yourself, if you know how to...
Viewpoint wrote:Kikapus plan equals TC capitulation


WC, for VP and all the other NeoPartitionist, anything that has to do with True Democracy, Human Rights, International Laws, EU Principles and Rule of Law are considered to be a "capitulation" by them to the GCs. Any other excuse given by them are pure rubbish/garbage.!

What is really amazing is that all your GC friends are actually Neopartitionists and you just pretend that they are not. Does it not worry you that perhaps Bananiot considers them as Neopartitionists in disguise?
Do you not realise that they are late converts to your ideas and that their intentions may be different? Do you value his judgement at all?


Considering Bananiot used his "judgement" and voted in favour of Annan (which was his right to do so) personally I'd take all further "judgement calls" by Bananiot with a pinch of salt.
User avatar
DT.
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 12684
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 8:34 pm
Location: Lefkosia

Postby YFred » Tue Mar 09, 2010 6:28 pm

DT. wrote:
YFred wrote:
Kikapu wrote:
wyoming cowboy wrote:how does it do that explain yourself, if you know how to...
Viewpoint wrote:Kikapus plan equals TC capitulation


WC, for VP and all the other NeoPartitionist, anything that has to do with True Democracy, Human Rights, International Laws, EU Principles and Rule of Law are considered to be a "capitulation" by them to the GCs. Any other excuse given by them are pure rubbish/garbage.!

What is really amazing is that all your GC friends are actually Neopartitionists and you just pretend that they are not. Does it not worry you that perhaps Bananiot considers them as Neopartitionists in disguise?
Do you not realise that they are late converts to your ideas and that their intentions may be different? Do you value his judgement at all?


Considering Bananiot used his "judgement" and voted in favour of Annan (which was his right to do so) personally I'd take all further "judgement calls" by Bananiot with a pinch of salt.

Considering you are one of those Partitionists pretending to be on the side International law, I expect you to say that. I would like Kick Baby's opinion on the matter and how he values Bananiot's opinion?
The Bash Patriots need not reply. Even though they visited Bodamya!
User avatar
YFred
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 12100
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 1:22 am
Location: Lurucina-Upon-Thames

Postby wyoming cowboy » Tue Mar 09, 2010 6:31 pm

YFRED be bold enough and answer the question on how a true federation with two constituent states is capitulation on the part of the Tc?
YFred wrote:
Kikapu wrote:
YFred wrote:
Viewpoint wrote:Your trick was to camaflouge the dangers TCs would face if they were foolish enough to adopt Kikapus capitulation plan. So basically you tried to sell us out.

VP, Kickapu is more decent then that. He was not selling us, he was giving us away. What was his reccomendation? 5% for the TRNC? Yeah right.


:lol: :lol: :lol:

Oh dear ol dear. We got the classic case of Blind leading the Blind here.! :lol:

Hi seeeeeeeeeee, said the blind man, What?
User avatar
wyoming cowboy
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1756
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 2:15 am

PreviousNext

Return to Cyprus Problem

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests