Cyprus-Forum.com

[Solveit]

Are you for real? Do you honestly think the ECHR has authorised the IPC to rule on who has legal ownership?

How did you manage to debate this across this thread while thinking that this was the case?

DT, Soleit believes that the recent ECHR ruling is a "Landmark" decision where whole of Europe has to abide by it, which I believe he is very much mistaken. This decision by the ECHR, as I understand it, is restricted ONLY on how the IPC in the "trnc" operates and what to take into consideration when providing redress for the GCs if they choose to apply to get it. If Solveit thinks that it is a landmark decision that IPC in the north has the power to determine who is now the owners of any property in the north, then he must also believe that the IPC in the "trnc" is also the organ who will now decide who is the owner of any property in the rest of the entire Europe since he believes that this was a "landmark" ruling by the ECHR, just like the Orams case was made by the ECJ.! The moment there is a settlement, then the IPC will become no longer as the arm of the occupying force of Turkey. At that time, this ruling by the ECHR should become no longer valid also. On the other hand, the Orams ruling was a landmark ruling and will remain so even if there is a settlement in Cyprus since the Orams ruling is now the fabric of all European courts unlike what the ECHR ruling gave the IPC in the "trnc". Lets hear it from CopperLine, to see what his take is on all this.!

Oh well I guess I can't stay away lol. Ok, I didn't mean 'landmark' in the sense that its something thats sets precedent for the whole of europe as in the ECJ ruling. And I agree Kikapu that in the event of a solution the IPC will probably not be used, thus the ECHR decision will not matter.

I know, the CF can be addictive sometimes.! OK, your above takes care of your "landmark ruling" statements, so lets not go any further with it.

HOWEVER, where it IS significant is that without a solution the IPC and thus the ruling, WILL be used to determine any applications from GC's in the meantime.

Well, what's changed. IPC was there before few days ago too, and whether the GCs applies to IPC or Turkey directly via the ECHR, it's the same thing, is it not.? The GCs applying to get redress will walk away with the same results, which is not very much. Until it is made clear that one cannot get compensation from the IPC for a GC not being able to use their property in the last 36 years as they could by going through the ECHR, that would be the only difference. Although it is a major difference, it only effects those who do not wish to sell their properties in the north, which seems to be the overwhelming majority of the GC refugees, therefore they will now concentrate of using the Orams ruling to go after the TCs and anyone else on trespass to get compensation with the TCs properties that are already in the south now. This ruling by the ECHR will not bring Compassion and Understanding as my friend Bir had hoped for. In fact, it may become more the case of "well show you" attitude by both sides.

In addition, The TC's will hold out for more in the talks knowing that the ECHR decision regarding the validity of the IPC decision making process is now approved as a valid remedy for those that wish to use it.

That's fair and square. So will the RoC hold out for more as being the only recognised government in Cyprus and that the north is still the territory of the RoC who still have a veto power over Turkey's EU aspirations. If there is no settlement, then the north remains the "welfare state" of Turkey, that's all.

The ECHR decision also shows the way of thinking amongst non Cypriots in terms of how the property problem can be remedied i.e. restitution, compensation or exchange, in a similar way that the AP did. So keep dreaming if you think that you will ALL return to your lands in the north.

Annan Plan was not just faulty on the property issues, but was faulty on all fronts, so lets not use the AP as a guide as to how the Cyprus problem should be solved, OK, and this is coming from a TC.!

Kikapu I pretty much agree with most of what you say, I guess that only time will tell regarding if GC try to use the trespass law again, although I still feel this will not succeed again.

My reference to AP wasn't to say it was the best, but, like the ECHR decision, it shows how others are starting to think in political and legal circles.

It goes without sayin g that the only way to solveit is by compromise on both sides and this will never happen as long as the GC's & TC's both demand it all, but then I guess you know that anyway.

[Kikapu]

Are you for real? Do you honestly think the ECHR has authorised the IPC to rule on who has legal ownership?

How did you manage to debate this across this thread while thinking that this was the case?

DT, Soleit believes that the recent ECHR ruling is a "Landmark" decision where whole of Europe has to abide by it, which I believe he is very much mistaken. This decision by the ECHR, as I understand it, is restricted ONLY on how the IPC in the "trnc" operates and what to take into consideration when providing redress for the GCs if they choose to apply to get it. If Solveit thinks that it is a landmark decision that IPC in the north has the power to determine who is now the owners of any property in the north, then he must also believe that the IPC in the "trnc" is also the organ who will now decide who is the owner of any property in the rest of the entire Europe since he believes that this was a "landmark" ruling by the ECHR, just like the Orams case was made by the ECJ.! The moment there is a settlement, then the IPC will become no longer as the arm of the occupying force of Turkey. At that time, this ruling by the ECHR should become no longer valid also. On the other hand, the Orams ruling was a landmark ruling and will remain so even if there is a settlement in Cyprus since the Orams ruling is now the fabric of all European courts unlike what the ECHR ruling gave the IPC in the "trnc". Lets hear it from CopperLine, to see what his take is on all this.!

Oh well I guess I can't stay away lol. Ok, I didn't mean 'landmark' in the sense that its something thats sets precedent for the whole of europe as in the ECJ ruling. And I agree Kikapu that in the event of a solution the IPC will probably not be used, thus the ECHR decision will not matter.

I know, the CF can be addictive sometimes.! OK, your above takes care of your "landmark ruling" statements, so lets not go any further with it.

HOWEVER, where it IS significant is that without a solution the IPC and thus the ruling, WILL be used to determine any applications from GC's in the meantime.

Well, what's changed. IPC was there before few days ago too, and whether the GCs applies to IPC or Turkey directly via the ECHR, it's the same thing, is it not.? The GCs applying to get redress will walk away with the same results, which is not very much. Until it is made clear that one cannot get compensation from the IPC for a GC not being able to use their property in the last 36 years as they could by going through the ECHR, that would be the only difference. Although it is a major difference, it only effects those who do not wish to sell their properties in the north, which seems to be the overwhelming majority of the GC refugees, therefore they will now concentrate of using the Orams ruling to go after the TCs and anyone else on trespass to get compensation with the TCs properties that are already in the south now. This ruling by the ECHR will not bring Compassion and Understanding as my friend Bir had hoped for. In fact, it may become more the case of "well show you" attitude by both sides.

In addition, The TC's will hold out for more in the talks knowing that the ECHR decision regarding the validity of the IPC decision making process is now approved as a valid remedy for those that wish to use it.

That's fair and square. So will the RoC hold out for more as being the only recognised government in Cyprus and that the north is still the territory of the RoC who still have a veto power over Turkey's EU aspirations. If there is no settlement, then the north remains the "welfare state" of Turkey, that's all.

The ECHR decision also shows the way of thinking amongst non Cypriots in terms of how the property problem can be remedied i.e. restitution, compensation or exchange, in a similar way that the AP did. So keep dreaming if you think that you will ALL return to your lands in the north.

Annan Plan was not just faulty on the property issues, but was faulty on all fronts, so lets not use the AP as a guide as to how the Cyprus problem should be solved, OK, and this is coming from a TC.!

Kikapu I pretty much agree with most of what you say, I guess that only time will tell regarding if GC try to use the trespass law again, although I still feel this will not succeed again.

My reference to AP wasn't to say it was the best, but, like the ECHR decision, it shows how others are starting to think in political and legal circles.

It goes without sayin g that the only way to solveit is by compromise on both sides and this will never happen as long as the GC's & TC's both demand it all, but then I guess you know that anyway.

Kikapu I pretty much agree with most of what you say

Good. You can leave now.!

[DTA]

Really is that right Erol?

I don't think Erol wants to embarrass you by giving you the answer.!:wink:

He will embarrass you not me!!

because the point I think he was making is that without knowing where EXACTLY the plot was it is just stupid to compare it to anywhere else in the world (hong kong).... or is all of Hong kong by the coast?

What you think is not important. What's is important is what Erol said and in what contexts he said it in. The fact that you did not understand what he was saying, does not make others stupid, just yourself.!

I have already explained the context is all Hong kong's land by the coast then? because that is the example he gave - later on the same thread giving an example of London which I also gave on the same thread

Like I said either extremely stupid or on a wind up.

You can't call me cleaver on one post and stupid in another. You need to take a stand as to which is it, because you had already contradicted yourself once already, which is not very smart thing to do and then turn around and call others stupid, just because you cannot fully comprehend the written English language well, written by others here on the forum.! [/quote]

When did I call you clever? and I gave you an option as well

[Solveit]

Are you for real? Do you honestly think the ECHR has authorised the IPC to rule on who has legal ownership?

How did you manage to debate this across this thread while thinking that this was the case?

DT, Soleit believes that the recent ECHR ruling is a "Landmark" decision where whole of Europe has to abide by it, which I believe he is very much mistaken. This decision by the ECHR, as I understand it, is restricted ONLY on how the IPC in the "trnc" operates and what to take into consideration when providing redress for the GCs if they choose to apply to get it. If Solveit thinks that it is a landmark decision that IPC in the north has the power to determine who is now the owners of any property in the north, then he must also believe that the IPC in the "trnc" is also the organ who will now decide who is the owner of any property in the rest of the entire Europe since he believes that this was a "landmark" ruling by the ECHR, just like the Orams case was made by the ECJ.! The moment there is a settlement, then the IPC will become no longer as the arm of the occupying force of Turkey. At that time, this ruling by the ECHR should become no longer valid also. On the other hand, the Orams ruling was a landmark ruling and will remain so even if there is a settlement in Cyprus since the Orams ruling is now the fabric of all European courts unlike what the ECHR ruling gave the IPC in the "trnc". Lets hear it from CopperLine, to see what his take is on all this.!

Oh well I guess I can't stay away lol. Ok, I didn't mean 'landmark' in the sense that its something thats sets precedent for the whole of europe as in the ECJ ruling. And I agree Kikapu that in the event of a solution the IPC will probably not be used, thus the ECHR decision will not matter.

I know, the CF can be addictive sometimes.! OK, your above takes care of your "landmark ruling" statements, so lets not go any further with it.

HOWEVER, where it IS significant is that without a solution the IPC and thus the ruling, WILL be used to determine any applications from GC's in the meantime.

Well, what's changed. IPC was there before few days ago too, and whether the GCs applies to IPC or Turkey directly via the ECHR, it's the same thing, is it not.? The GCs applying to get redress will walk away with the same results, which is not very much. Until it is made clear that one cannot get compensation from the IPC for a GC not being able to use their property in the last 36 years as they could by going through the ECHR, that would be the only difference. Although it is a major difference, it only effects those who do not wish to sell their properties in the north, which seems to be the overwhelming majority of the GC refugees, therefore they will now concentrate of using the Orams ruling to go after the TCs and anyone else on trespass to get compensation with the TCs properties that are already in the south now. This ruling by the ECHR will not bring Compassion and Understanding as my friend Bir had hoped for. In fact, it may become more the case of "well show you" attitude by both sides.

In addition, The TC's will hold out for more in the talks knowing that the ECHR decision regarding the validity of the IPC decision making process is now approved as a valid remedy for those that wish to use it.

That's fair and square. So will the RoC hold out for more as being the only recognised government in Cyprus and that the north is still the territory of the RoC who still have a veto power over Turkey's EU aspirations. If there is no settlement, then the north remains the "welfare state" of Turkey, that's all.

The ECHR decision also shows the way of thinking amongst non Cypriots in terms of how the property problem can be remedied i.e. restitution, compensation or exchange, in a similar way that the AP did. So keep dreaming if you think that you will ALL return to your lands in the north.

Annan Plan was not just faulty on the property issues, but was faulty on all fronts, so lets not use the AP as a guide as to how the Cyprus problem should be solved, OK, and this is coming from a TC.!

Kikapu I pretty much agree with most of what you say, I guess that only time will tell regarding if GC try to use the trespass law again, although I still feel this will not succeed again.

My reference to AP wasn't to say it was the best, but, like the ECHR decision, it shows how others are starting to think in political and legal circles.

It goes without sayin g that the only way to solveit is by compromise on both sides and this will never happen as long as the GC's & TC's both demand it all, but then I guess you know that anyway.

Kikapu I pretty much agree with most of what you say

Good. You can leave now.!

Haha, i said 'most'

[Kikapu]

Really is that right Erol?

I don't think Erol wants to embarrass you by giving you the answer.!:wink:

He will embarrass you not me!!

because the point I think he was making is that without knowing where EXACTLY the plot was it is just stupid to compare it to anywhere else in the world (hong kong).... or is all of Hong kong by the coast?

What you think is not important. What's is important is what Erol said and in what contexts he said it in. The fact that you did not understand what he was saying, does not make others stupid, just yourself.!

I have already explained the context is all Hong kong's land by the coast then? because that is the example he gave - later on the same thread giving an example of London which I also gave on the same thread

Like I said either extremely stupid or on a wind up.

You can't call me cleaver on one post and stupid in another. You need to take a stand as to which is it, because you had already contradicted yourself once already, which is not very smart thing to do and then turn around and call others stupid, just because you cannot fully comprehend the written English language well, written by others here on the forum.!

When did I call you clever? and I gave you an option as well [/quote]

You are truly clever I think you should tell them to do so... I can't see a downside at all....

http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.p ... &start=300

Now say you are sorry and in the future try to remember what you write to me, because I remember everything.!:idea:

[DTA]

Really is that right Erol?

I don't think Erol wants to embarrass you by giving you the answer.!:wink:

He will embarrass you not me!!

because the point I think he was making is that without knowing where EXACTLY the plot was it is just stupid to compare it to anywhere else in the world (hong kong).... or is all of Hong kong by the coast?

What you think is not important. What's is important is what Erol said and in what contexts he said it in. The fact that you did not understand what he was saying, does not make others stupid, just yourself.!

I have already explained the context is all Hong kong's land by the coast then? because that is the example he gave - later on the same thread giving an example of London which I also gave on the same thread

Like I said either extremely stupid or on a wind up.

You can't call me cleaver on one post and stupid in another. You need to take a stand as to which is it, because you had already contradicted yourself once already, which is not very smart thing to do and then turn around and call others stupid, just because you cannot fully comprehend the written English language well, written by others here on the forum.!

When did I call you clever? and I gave you an option as well

You are truly clever I think you should tell them to do so... I can't see a downside at all....

http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.p ... &start=300

Now say you are sorry and in the future try to remember what you write to me, because I remember everything.!:idea:[/quote]

was I?:

a) taking the piss because of you idiotic suggestion
b) taking the p because of you idiotic suggestion
c) taking the F****** piss because of you idiotic suggestion.

I will let you choose anyone of those three options my GC brother.

As you mentioned earlier it is all about context... but you seem unable to identify what the context is.

That is strike two one more an your out.

[Kikapu]

You can claim anything you want after the fact, DTA, but the fact remains that you stated that you have not called me cleaver, which I have proven you wrong.!

Now, leave me alone, I need to get dinner ready.!

[DTA]

Really is that right Erol?

I don't think Erol wants to embarrass you by giving you the answer.!:wink:

He will embarrass you not me!!

because the point I think he was making is that without knowing where EXACTLY the plot was it is just stupid to compare it to anywhere else in the world (hong kong).... or is all of Hong kong by the coast?

What you think is not important. What's is important is what Erol said and in what contexts he said it in. The fact that you did not understand what he was saying, does not make others stupid, just yourself.!

I have already explained the context is all Hong kong's land by the coast then? because that is the example he gave - later on the same thread giving an example of London which I also gave on the same thread

Like I said either extremely stupid or on a wind up.

You can't call me cleaver on one post and stupid in another. You need to take a stand as to which is it, because you had already contradicted yourself once already, which is not very smart thing to do and then turn around and call others stupid, just because you cannot fully comprehend the written English language well, written by others here on the forum.!

When did I call you clever? and I gave you an option as well

You are truly clever I think you should tell them to do so... I can't see a downside at all....

http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.p ... &start=300

Now say you are sorry and in the future try to remember what you write to me, because I remember everything.!:idea:

was I?:

a) taking the piss because of you idiotic suggestion
b) taking the p because of you idiotic suggestion
c) taking the F****** piss because of you idiotic suggestion.

I will let you choose anyone of those three options my GC brother.

As you mentioned earlier it is all about context... but you seem unable to identify what the context is.

That is strike two one more an your out.

You can make all the excuses you want after the fact, DTA. The fact is you said that you never said that I was cleaver, and I have proven you wrong with your own words..

Now, leave me alone, I need to get dinner ready.!

there is no excuses only an idiot or somebody on a wide up could not tell that I was taking the piss - here is the context just to refresh your memory:

Erol, what I'm saying is, the GC's can go to the IPC to do 2 things only.

1) to get their land back

2) get compensation from Turkey for not being able to use their land since 1974

KIKAPOOOOOOOOOOO!!!! Wrote:
If the GCs were to sell their land to the RoC, sure it will be cheaper to Turkey, but at the same time, Turkey won't be able to buy cheap land from the GCs either. Instead, it can be bought by the RoC just so to ensure there is pleanty of GC owned land in the north in order to make the claim true, that the north is occupied by Turkey and that most of the land in the north belongs to the GCs.

DTA wrote:
You are truly clever I think you should tell them to do so... I can't see a downside at all....

oh.... except for ... You know what you figure that out yourself.

As this was the same point I wont in the spirit of unity with a my GC friend include this as your third strike

so what are you cooking for dinner?

[Kikapu]

Really is that right Erol?

I don't think Erol wants to embarrass you by giving you the answer.!:wink:

He will embarrass you not me!!

because the point I think he was making is that without knowing where EXACTLY the plot was it is just stupid to compare it to anywhere else in the world (hong kong).... or is all of Hong kong by the coast?

What you think is not important. What's is important is what Erol said and in what contexts he said it in. The fact that you did not understand what he was saying, does not make others stupid, just yourself.!

I have already explained the context is all Hong kong's land by the coast then? because that is the example he gave - later on the same thread giving an example of London which I also gave on the same thread

Like I said either extremely stupid or on a wind up.

You can't call me cleaver on one post and stupid in another. You need to take a stand as to which is it, because you had already contradicted yourself once already, which is not very smart thing to do and then turn around and call others stupid, just because you cannot fully comprehend the written English language well, written by others here on the forum.!

When did I call you clever? and I gave you an option as well

You are truly clever I think you should tell them to do so... I can't see a downside at all....

http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.p ... &start=300

Now say you are sorry and in the future try to remember what you write to me, because I remember everything.!:idea:

was I?:

a) taking the piss because of you idiotic suggestion
b) taking the p because of you idiotic suggestion
c) taking the F****** piss because of you idiotic suggestion.

I will let you choose anyone of those three options my GC brother.

As you mentioned earlier it is all about context... but you seem unable to identify what the context is.

That is strike two one more an your out.

You can make all the excuses you want after the fact, DTA. The fact is you said that you never said that I was cleaver, and I have proven you wrong with your own words..

Now, leave me alone, I need to get dinner ready.!

there is no excuses only an idiot or somebody on a wide up could tell that I was not taking the piss - here is the context just to refresh your memory:

Erol, what I'm saying is, the GC's can go to the IPC to do 2 things only.

1) to get their land back

2) get compensation from Turkey for not being able to use their land since 1974

KIKAPOOOOOOOOOOO!!!! Wrote:
If the GCs were to sell their land to the RoC, sure it will be cheaper to Turkey, but at the same time, Turkey won't be able to buy cheap land from the GCs either. Instead, it can be bought by the RoC just so to ensure there is pleanty of GC owned land in the north in order to make the claim true, that the north is occupied by Turkey and that most of the land in the north belongs to the GCs.

DTA wrote:
You are truly clever I think you should tell them to do so... I can't see a downside at all....

oh.... except for ... You know what you figure that out yourself.

As this was the same point I wont in the spirit of unity with a my GC friend include this as your third strike

so what are you cooking for dinner?

Turkey.!!

No, no, I'm cooking Pasta tossed with chilly (hot) olive oil, Italian Herbs and Garlic with grated Parmesan cheese under the pasta (on the plate) and then on top of the pasta too, just like how TCs/Turks do it.!

[DTA]

Really is that right Erol?

I don't think Erol wants to embarrass you by giving you the answer.!:wink:

He will embarrass you not me!!

because the point I think he was making is that without knowing where EXACTLY the plot was it is just stupid to compare it to anywhere else in the world (hong kong).... or is all of Hong kong by the coast?

What you think is not important. What's is important is what Erol said and in what contexts he said it in. The fact that you did not understand what he was saying, does not make others stupid, just yourself.!

I have already explained the context is all Hong kong's land by the coast then? because that is the example he gave - later on the same thread giving an example of London which I also gave on the same thread

Like I said either extremely stupid or on a wind up.

You can't call me cleaver on one post and stupid in another. You need to take a stand as to which is it, because you had already contradicted yourself once already, which is not very smart thing to do and then turn around and call others stupid, just because you cannot fully comprehend the written English language well, written by others here on the forum.!

When did I call you clever? and I gave you an option as well

You are truly clever I think you should tell them to do so... I can't see a downside at all....

http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.p ... &start=300

Now say you are sorry and in the future try to remember what you write to me, because I remember everything.!:idea:

was I?:

a) taking the piss because of you idiotic suggestion
b) taking the p because of you idiotic suggestion
c) taking the F****** piss because of you idiotic suggestion.

I will let you choose anyone of those three options my GC brother.

As you mentioned earlier it is all about context... but you seem unable to identify what the context is.

That is strike two one more an your out.

You can make all the excuses you want after the fact, DTA. The fact is you said that you never said that I was cleaver, and I have proven you wrong with your own words..

Now, leave me alone, I need to get dinner ready.!

there is no excuses only an idiot or somebody on a wide up could tell that I was not taking the piss - here is the context just to refresh your memory:

Erol, what I'm saying is, the GC's can go to the IPC to do 2 things only.

1) to get their land back

2) get compensation from Turkey for not being able to use their land since 1974

KIKAPOOOOOOOOOOO!!!! Wrote:
If the GCs were to sell their land to the RoC, sure it will be cheaper to Turkey, but at the same time, Turkey won't be able to buy cheap land from the GCs either. Instead, it can be bought by the RoC just so to ensure there is pleanty of GC owned land in the north in order to make the claim true, that the north is occupied by Turkey and that most of the land in the north belongs to the GCs.

DTA wrote:
You are truly clever I think you should tell them to do so... I can't see a downside at all....

oh.... except for ... You know what you figure that out yourself.

As this was the same point I wont in the spirit of unity with a my GC friend include this as your third strike

so what are you cooking for dinner?

Turkey.!!

No, no, I'm cooking Pasta tossed with chilly (hot) olive oil, Italian Herbs and Garlic with grated Parmesan cheese under the pasta (on the plate) and then on top of the pasta too, just like how TCs/Turks do it.!

that sounds nice, you made me hungry now