Cyprus-Forum.com

[B25]

But I don't want to sell my property to Turkey or anyone else. Surely that is against my Human rights. isn't that one of the articles, ones right to their property???

Why should I be forced to sell it?? By way of example, I want to buy my current neighbours land, should I be able to force him to do this?? Why then is there going to be a special rule for Turkey??? I think the 'ECHR' has made a knee jerk reaction and licked itself in the goolies if you ask me.

[Kikapu]

Following the decision, Constantis Candounas, the lawyer who represented Meletis Apostolides in the Orams case, called on every Greek Cypriot refugee to apply to the IPC to seek restitution of their property rights.
Demetriades, who won a breakthrough case at the ECHR for refugee Titina Loizidou, argues that people must decide what they want to do. “If people want to apply to the commission to reach Strasbourg then they should go to the IPC.

So whats the game plan here, I have been wondering to my self.? Why are these two well known lawyers are asking the GC refugees to go to the IPC to claim their properties back, when they know that the IPC or the courts in the north who are under the directions from Turkey, are not going to give very much back by declaring that they will not remove anyone from the homes of the GCs in the north to return the properties, siting the recent ECHR ruling.

There could be several reasons, but let me tell you what I think the game plan is. The plan is for the GCs to apply to the IPC and demand their properties that are fields, factories, hotels , and any other property that are not homes. By asking the IPC to return these properties, plus compensation for not being able to use them since 1974, the IPC or the courts in the north can hardly use the argument that they will be making anyone homeless. Once there are enough rejections by the IPC and the courts in the north, all these cases will end up on the door steps of the ECHR again, and this time, the ECHR will be find it very difficult to site it's own ruling as to why these GCs did not get their properties back. But at some point, these two lawyers will also make the case that the ECHR recent rulings are also Racists towards the GCs, by declaring, that it is only the GCs who are asked to take compensation for their properties in the north to avoid making people homeless. They can make the argument, that Turkey can compensate the occupants of the GCs properties instead to find another place to live and return the property back to the GC owner. How can the ECHR declare that people will be made homeless if Turkey is paying them (TCs, settlers and others) good money to vacate that property so that they can live somewhere else in the same village if they choose to. This can be cheaper for Turkey also. Now, we know why Turkey wants to buy as much GC properties as possible, but even if they bought every single GC property in the north with the money they do not have, that's all they have done, bought property and not 1/3 of a country to claim it for Turkey. All the properties they buy will have to remain in the territory of the RoC. Just by buying land does not mean you are buying part of a country, does it.??

But there is another problem for the TCs. It is Turkey that is buying these properties and not the TCs, which means, even if the north were to partition at some point, the TCs will own very little since 80% of the properties in the north belong to the GCs, which will become Turkey's. How would you like to have your partitioned part of Cyprus after decades of having Taksim Dreams, then let Turkey own 80% of it to do as she wishes with it that may not be so "health society friendly".In the meantime, since Turkey has paid for the GC properties in the north, the TCs will lose their own properties in the south, which are at a much higher premium than they were when the TCs took the so called "exchange" land, because whether the present status quo continues or by some miracle the north becomes partitioned off to become "Little Turkey", the economic situation in the north is doomed in relation to the EU standards. No amount of direct flights, direct trade is going to help the north to advance their present economy to make a dent in their living standards, specially once they have sold off the GCs land that they are holding now. The economy in the north will run in parallels with Turkey's, and despite the much gloating of Turkey's overall size of it's economy on the world's stage, it means very little to the average man on the street, because he will still remain poor to the Europeans.

So, what is the game plan I ask myself of what these two lawyers, Candounas and Demetriades are trying to do.??

You have missed the whole point. IPC is not tasked to hand back properties in every case. They will decide just like roc, as to what can be given back and who can get just compensation. As per usual your understaning is way off the mark, as to Dickmitrades and Cuntounas, doings is not the issue but where they are heading and that is hell where their frinds are - Makarios, Grivas, Yorgadjis, TPapa is waiting for them.

I did not miss anything, YFred. The IPC and the north's courts will follow the letter of the ECHR ruling in not to give any property back, but how can the ECHR excuse itself from it's own ruling, when the GCs will be asking properties that does not make the TCs homeless by returning non house properties.??

As for your vicious condemnation of the two lawyers, what the hell is that all about. You have become a real Fascists of late..??

As for the RoC, they too now will eventually use the ECHR ruling to decline giving any TC properties back and instead offer silly money too to the TCs. Since there are 4 times more GC refugees in 4 times less TC properties than the north, all the TCs properties in the south must be occupied by the GC refugees.

Your feelings for two individuals who are determined to destroy the TC economy, first the construction and now the Tourism is just beyond belief.
Never mind Kicks, carry on mate. You are doing a wonderful job at bringing the two communities together.

Wait one minute, YFred. These lawyers did not bring the case themselves, but were going about their profession. Are you going to condemn lawyers for providing a legal service to anyone who asks for it.?? Really.?? I guess all murderers should just be hung without legal representation, right.?? Even Saddam got legal representation. They represented a client in the court, that's all. If you want to blame anyone, blame the judges at the ICJ, and while you are at it, blame the judges at the ECHR as well, but not the ones just for proving their professional services.!

[Kikapu]

But I don't want to sell my property to Turkey or anyone else. Surely that is against my Human rights. isn't that one of the articles, ones right to their property???

Why should I be forced to sell it?? By way of example, I want to buy my current neighbours land, should I be able to force him to do this?? Why then is there going to be a special rule for Turkey??? I think the 'ECHR' has made a knee jerk reaction and licked itself in the goolies if you ask me.

Perhaps they been hanging around our good friend, Zan, for too long.!

what do you expect Richy baby.....We are animals.....We lick our balls every chance we get.....It is your still moist balls that should be worrying you....Who's been licking them...It certainly is not us....You dog you!!!!

http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.p ... c&start=10

[YFred]

Following the decision, Constantis Candounas, the lawyer who represented Meletis Apostolides in the Orams case, called on every Greek Cypriot refugee to apply to the IPC to seek restitution of their property rights.
Demetriades, who won a breakthrough case at the ECHR for refugee Titina Loizidou, argues that people must decide what they want to do. “If people want to apply to the commission to reach Strasbourg then they should go to the IPC.

So whats the game plan here, I have been wondering to my self.? Why are these two well known lawyers are asking the GC refugees to go to the IPC to claim their properties back, when they know that the IPC or the courts in the north who are under the directions from Turkey, are not going to give very much back by declaring that they will not remove anyone from the homes of the GCs in the north to return the properties, siting the recent ECHR ruling.

There could be several reasons, but let me tell you what I think the game plan is. The plan is for the GCs to apply to the IPC and demand their properties that are fields, factories, hotels , and any other property that are not homes. By asking the IPC to return these properties, plus compensation for not being able to use them since 1974, the IPC or the courts in the north can hardly use the argument that they will be making anyone homeless. Once there are enough rejections by the IPC and the courts in the north, all these cases will end up on the door steps of the ECHR again, and this time, the ECHR will be find it very difficult to site it's own ruling as to why these GCs did not get their properties back. But at some point, these two lawyers will also make the case that the ECHR recent rulings are also Racists towards the GCs, by declaring, that it is only the GCs who are asked to take compensation for their properties in the north to avoid making people homeless. They can make the argument, that Turkey can compensate the occupants of the GCs properties instead to find another place to live and return the property back to the GC owner. How can the ECHR declare that people will be made homeless if Turkey is paying them (TCs, settlers and others) good money to vacate that property so that they can live somewhere else in the same village if they choose to. This can be cheaper for Turkey also. Now, we know why Turkey wants to buy as much GC properties as possible, but even if they bought every single GC property in the north with the money they do not have, that's all they have done, bought property and not 1/3 of a country to claim it for Turkey. All the properties they buy will have to remain in the territory of the RoC. Just by buying land does not mean you are buying part of a country, does it.??

But there is another problem for the TCs. It is Turkey that is buying these properties and not the TCs, which means, even if the north were to partition at some point, the TCs will own very little since 80% of the properties in the north belong to the GCs, which will become Turkey's. How would you like to have your partitioned part of Cyprus after decades of having Taksim Dreams, then let Turkey own 80% of it to do as she wishes with it that may not be so "health society friendly".In the meantime, since Turkey has paid for the GC properties in the north, the TCs will lose their own properties in the south, which are at a much higher premium than they were when the TCs took the so called "exchange" land, because whether the present status quo continues or by some miracle the north becomes partitioned off to become "Little Turkey", the economic situation in the north is doomed in relation to the EU standards. No amount of direct flights, direct trade is going to help the north to advance their present economy to make a dent in their living standards, specially once they have sold off the GCs land that they are holding now. The economy in the north will run in parallels with Turkey's, and despite the much gloating of Turkey's overall size of it's economy on the world's stage, it means very little to the average man on the street, because he will still remain poor to the Europeans.

So, what is the game plan I ask myself of what these two lawyers, Candounas and Demetriades are trying to do.??

You have missed the whole point. IPC is not tasked to hand back properties in every case. They will decide just like roc, as to what can be given back and who can get just compensation. As per usual your understaning is way off the mark, as to Dickmitrades and Cuntounas, doings is not the issue but where they are heading and that is hell where their frinds are - Makarios, Grivas, Yorgadjis, TPapa is waiting for them.

I did not miss anything, YFred. The IPC and the north's courts will follow the letter of the ECHR ruling in not to give any property back, but how can the ECHR excuse itself from it's own ruling, when the GCs will be asking properties that does not make the TCs homeless by returning non house properties.??

As for your vicious condemnation of the two lawyers, what the hell is that all about. You have become a real Fascists of late..??

As for the RoC, they too now will eventually use the ECHR ruling to decline giving any TC properties back and instead offer silly money too to the TCs. Since there are 4 times more GC refugees in 4 times less TC properties than the north, all the TCs properties in the south must be occupied by the GC refugees.

Your feelings for two individuals who are determined to destroy the TC economy, first the construction and now the Tourism is just beyond belief.
Never mind Kicks, carry on mate. You are doing a wonderful job at bringing the two communities together.

Wait one minute, YFred. These lawyers did not bring the case themselves, but were going about their profession. Are you going to condemn lawyers for providing a legal service to anyone who asks for it.?? Really.?? I guess all murderers should just be hung without legal representation, right.?? Even Saddam got legal representation. They represented a client in the court, that's all. If you want to blame anyone, blame the judges at the ICJ, and while you are at it, blame the judges at the ECHR as well, but not the ones just for proving their professional services.!

Did you not read the report where he said the construction industry is done now it is time to turn on tourism. You really are blind to what these court cases are about. Even ECHR has seen it. God man will you wake up. Shit will hit you in the face but because it GC you'll be saying who's are these lovely roses then?

[Kikapu]

Following the decision, Constantis Candounas, the lawyer who represented Meletis Apostolides in the Orams case, called on every Greek Cypriot refugee to apply to the IPC to seek restitution of their property rights.
Demetriades, who won a breakthrough case at the ECHR for refugee Titina Loizidou, argues that people must decide what they want to do. “If people want to apply to the commission to reach Strasbourg then they should go to the IPC.

So whats the game plan here, I have been wondering to my self.? Why are these two well known lawyers are asking the GC refugees to go to the IPC to claim their properties back, when they know that the IPC or the courts in the north who are under the directions from Turkey, are not going to give very much back by declaring that they will not remove anyone from the homes of the GCs in the north to return the properties, siting the recent ECHR ruling.

There could be several reasons, but let me tell you what I think the game plan is. The plan is for the GCs to apply to the IPC and demand their properties that are fields, factories, hotels , and any other property that are not homes. By asking the IPC to return these properties, plus compensation for not being able to use them since 1974, the IPC or the courts in the north can hardly use the argument that they will be making anyone homeless. Once there are enough rejections by the IPC and the courts in the north, all these cases will end up on the door steps of the ECHR again, and this time, the ECHR will be find it very difficult to site it's own ruling as to why these GCs did not get their properties back. But at some point, these two lawyers will also make the case that the ECHR recent rulings are also Racists towards the GCs, by declaring, that it is only the GCs who are asked to take compensation for their properties in the north to avoid making people homeless. They can make the argument, that Turkey can compensate the occupants of the GCs properties instead to find another place to live and return the property back to the GC owner. How can the ECHR declare that people will be made homeless if Turkey is paying them (TCs, settlers and others) good money to vacate that property so that they can live somewhere else in the same village if they choose to. This can be cheaper for Turkey also. Now, we know why Turkey wants to buy as much GC properties as possible, but even if they bought every single GC property in the north with the money they do not have, that's all they have done, bought property and not 1/3 of a country to claim it for Turkey. All the properties they buy will have to remain in the territory of the RoC. Just by buying land does not mean you are buying part of a country, does it.??

But there is another problem for the TCs. It is Turkey that is buying these properties and not the TCs, which means, even if the north were to partition at some point, the TCs will own very little since 80% of the properties in the north belong to the GCs, which will become Turkey's. How would you like to have your partitioned part of Cyprus after decades of having Taksim Dreams, then let Turkey own 80% of it to do as she wishes with it that may not be so "health society friendly".In the meantime, since Turkey has paid for the GC properties in the north, the TCs will lose their own properties in the south, which are at a much higher premium than they were when the TCs took the so called "exchange" land, because whether the present status quo continues or by some miracle the north becomes partitioned off to become "Little Turkey", the economic situation in the north is doomed in relation to the EU standards. No amount of direct flights, direct trade is going to help the north to advance their present economy to make a dent in their living standards, specially once they have sold off the GCs land that they are holding now. The economy in the north will run in parallels with Turkey's, and despite the much gloating of Turkey's overall size of it's economy on the world's stage, it means very little to the average man on the street, because he will still remain poor to the Europeans.

So, what is the game plan I ask myself of what these two lawyers, Candounas and Demetriades are trying to do.??

You have missed the whole point. IPC is not tasked to hand back properties in every case. They will decide just like roc, as to what can be given back and who can get just compensation. As per usual your understaning is way off the mark, as to Dickmitrades and Cuntounas, doings is not the issue but where they are heading and that is hell where their frinds are - Makarios, Grivas, Yorgadjis, TPapa is waiting for them.

I did not miss anything, YFred. The IPC and the north's courts will follow the letter of the ECHR ruling in not to give any property back, but how can the ECHR excuse itself from it's own ruling, when the GCs will be asking properties that does not make the TCs homeless by returning non house properties.??

As for your vicious condemnation of the two lawyers, what the hell is that all about. You have become a real Fascists of late..??

As for the RoC, they too now will eventually use the ECHR ruling to decline giving any TC properties back and instead offer silly money too to the TCs. Since there are 4 times more GC refugees in 4 times less TC properties than the north, all the TCs properties in the south must be occupied by the GC refugees.

Your feelings for two individuals who are determined to destroy the TC economy, first the construction and now the Tourism is just beyond belief.
Never mind Kicks, carry on mate. You are doing a wonderful job at bringing the two communities together.

Wait one minute, YFred. These lawyers did not bring the case themselves, but were going about their profession. Are you going to condemn lawyers for providing a legal service to anyone who asks for it.?? Really.?? I guess all murderers should just be hung without legal representation, right.?? Even Saddam got legal representation. They represented a client in the court, that's all. If you want to blame anyone, blame the judges at the ICJ, and while you are at it, blame the judges at the ECHR as well, but not the ones just for proving their professional services.!

Did you not read the report where he said the construction industry is done now it is time to turn on tourism. You really are blind to what these court cases are about. Even ECHR has seen it. God man will you wake up. Shit will hit you in the face but because it GC you'll be saying who's are these lovely roses then?

Just answer the question and leave your pointless editorials. Must a lawyer be crucified for trying to win a case for his client. YES or NO. ???

[DTA]

Following the decision, Constantis Candounas, the lawyer who represented Meletis Apostolides in the Orams case, called on every Greek Cypriot refugee to apply to the IPC to seek restitution of their property rights.
Demetriades, who won a breakthrough case at the ECHR for refugee Titina Loizidou, argues that people must decide what they want to do. “If people want to apply to the commission to reach Strasbourg then they should go to the IPC.

So whats the game plan here, I have been wondering to my self.? Why are these two well known lawyers are asking the GC refugees to go to the IPC to claim their properties back, when they know that the IPC or the courts in the north who are under the directions from Turkey, are not going to give very much back by declaring that they will not remove anyone from the homes of the GCs in the north to return the properties, siting the recent ECHR ruling.

There could be several reasons, but let me tell you what I think the game plan is. The plan is for the GCs to apply to the IPC and demand their properties that are fields, factories, hotels , and any other property that are not homes. By asking the IPC to return these properties, plus compensation for not being able to use them since 1974, the IPC or the courts in the north can hardly use the argument that they will be making anyone homeless. Once there are enough rejections by the IPC and the courts in the north, all these cases will end up on the door steps of the ECHR again, and this time, the ECHR will be find it very difficult to site it's own ruling as to why these GCs did not get their properties back. But at some point, these two lawyers will also make the case that the ECHR recent rulings are also Racists towards the GCs, by declaring, that it is only the GCs who are asked to take compensation for their properties in the north to avoid making people homeless. They can make the argument, that Turkey can compensate the occupants of the GCs properties instead to find another place to live and return the property back to the GC owner. How can the ECHR declare that people will be made homeless if Turkey is paying them (TCs, settlers and others) good money to vacate that property so that they can live somewhere else in the same village if they choose to. This can be cheaper for Turkey also. Now, we know why Turkey wants to buy as much GC properties as possible, but even if they bought every single GC property in the north with the money they do not have, that's all they have done, bought property and not 1/3 of a country to claim it for Turkey. All the properties they buy will have to remain in the territory of the RoC. Just by buying land does not mean you are buying part of a country, does it.??

But there is another problem for the TCs. It is Turkey that is buying these properties and not the TCs, which means, even if the north were to partition at some point, the TCs will own very little since 80% of the properties in the north belong to the GCs, which will become Turkey's. How would you like to have your partitioned part of Cyprus after decades of having Taksim Dreams, then let Turkey own 80% of it to do as she wishes with it that may not be so "health society friendly".In the meantime, since Turkey has paid for the GC properties in the north, the TCs will lose their own properties in the south, which are at a much higher premium than they were when the TCs took the so called "exchange" land, because whether the present status quo continues or by some miracle the north becomes partitioned off to become "Little Turkey", the economic situation in the north is doomed in relation to the EU standards. No amount of direct flights, direct trade is going to help the north to advance their present economy to make a dent in their living standards, specially once they have sold off the GCs land that they are holding now. The economy in the north will run in parallels with Turkey's, and despite the much gloating of Turkey's overall size of it's economy on the world's stage, it means very little to the average man on the street, because he will still remain poor to the Europeans.

So, what is the game plan I ask myself of what these two lawyers, Candounas and Demetriades are trying to do.??

You have missed the whole point. IPC is not tasked to hand back properties in every case. They will decide just like roc, as to what can be given back and who can get just compensation. As per usual your understaning is way off the mark, as to Dickmitrades and Cuntounas, doings is not the issue but where they are heading and that is hell where their frinds are - Makarios, Grivas, Yorgadjis, TPapa is waiting for them.

I did not miss anything, YFred. The IPC and the north's courts will follow the letter of the ECHR ruling in not to give any property back, but how can the ECHR excuse itself from it's own ruling, when the GCs will be asking properties that does not make the TCs homeless by returning non house properties.??

As for your vicious condemnation of the two lawyers, what the hell is that all about. You have become a real Fascists of late..??

As for the RoC, they too now will eventually use the ECHR ruling to decline giving any TC properties back and instead offer silly money too to the TCs. Since there are 4 times more GC refugees in 4 times less TC properties than the north, all the TCs properties in the south must be occupied by the GC refugees.

Your feelings for two individuals who are determined to destroy the TC economy, first the construction and now the Tourism is just beyond belief.
Never mind Kicks, carry on mate. You are doing a wonderful job at bringing the two communities together.

Wait one minute, YFred. These lawyers did not bring the case themselves, but were going about their profession. Are you going to condemn lawyers for providing a legal service to anyone who asks for it.?? Really.?? I guess all murderers should just be hung without legal representation, right.?? Even Saddam got legal representation. They represented a client in the court, that's all. If you want to blame anyone, blame the judges at the ICJ, and while you are at it, blame the judges at the ECHR as well, but not the ones just for proving their professional services.!

Did you not read the report where he said the construction industry is done now it is time to turn on tourism. You really are blind to what these court cases are about. Even ECHR has seen it. God man will you wake up. Shit will hit you in the face but because it GC you'll be saying who's are these lovely roses then?

Just answer the question and leave your pointless editorials. Must a lawyer be crucified for trying to win a case for his client. YES or NO. ???

Dude this is a strategy that has been many years in the planning by the GC lawyers - and you would not believe the authority that I have that on.

This is another case of you defending all things GC which I would not mind if you were a GC or if you defended everything TC with as much effort but you are not (so you claim) and you dont.

[Kikapu]

Following the decision, Constantis Candounas, the lawyer who represented Meletis Apostolides in the Orams case, called on every Greek Cypriot refugee to apply to the IPC to seek restitution of their property rights.
Demetriades, who won a breakthrough case at the ECHR for refugee Titina Loizidou, argues that people must decide what they want to do. “If people want to apply to the commission to reach Strasbourg then they should go to the IPC.

So whats the game plan here, I have been wondering to my self.? Why are these two well known lawyers are asking the GC refugees to go to the IPC to claim their properties back, when they know that the IPC or the courts in the north who are under the directions from Turkey, are not going to give very much back by declaring that they will not remove anyone from the homes of the GCs in the north to return the properties, siting the recent ECHR ruling.

There could be several reasons, but let me tell you what I think the game plan is. The plan is for the GCs to apply to the IPC and demand their properties that are fields, factories, hotels , and any other property that are not homes. By asking the IPC to return these properties, plus compensation for not being able to use them since 1974, the IPC or the courts in the north can hardly use the argument that they will be making anyone homeless. Once there are enough rejections by the IPC and the courts in the north, all these cases will end up on the door steps of the ECHR again, and this time, the ECHR will be find it very difficult to site it's own ruling as to why these GCs did not get their properties back. But at some point, these two lawyers will also make the case that the ECHR recent rulings are also Racists towards the GCs, by declaring, that it is only the GCs who are asked to take compensation for their properties in the north to avoid making people homeless. They can make the argument, that Turkey can compensate the occupants of the GCs properties instead to find another place to live and return the property back to the GC owner. How can the ECHR declare that people will be made homeless if Turkey is paying them (TCs, settlers and others) good money to vacate that property so that they can live somewhere else in the same village if they choose to. This can be cheaper for Turkey also. Now, we know why Turkey wants to buy as much GC properties as possible, but even if they bought every single GC property in the north with the money they do not have, that's all they have done, bought property and not 1/3 of a country to claim it for Turkey. All the properties they buy will have to remain in the territory of the RoC. Just by buying land does not mean you are buying part of a country, does it.??

But there is another problem for the TCs. It is Turkey that is buying these properties and not the TCs, which means, even if the north were to partition at some point, the TCs will own very little since 80% of the properties in the north belong to the GCs, which will become Turkey's. How would you like to have your partitioned part of Cyprus after decades of having Taksim Dreams, then let Turkey own 80% of it to do as she wishes with it that may not be so "health society friendly".In the meantime, since Turkey has paid for the GC properties in the north, the TCs will lose their own properties in the south, which are at a much higher premium than they were when the TCs took the so called "exchange" land, because whether the present status quo continues or by some miracle the north becomes partitioned off to become "Little Turkey", the economic situation in the north is doomed in relation to the EU standards. No amount of direct flights, direct trade is going to help the north to advance their present economy to make a dent in their living standards, specially once they have sold off the GCs land that they are holding now. The economy in the north will run in parallels with Turkey's, and despite the much gloating of Turkey's overall size of it's economy on the world's stage, it means very little to the average man on the street, because he will still remain poor to the Europeans.

So, what is the game plan I ask myself of what these two lawyers, Candounas and Demetriades are trying to do.??

You have missed the whole point. IPC is not tasked to hand back properties in every case. They will decide just like roc, as to what can be given back and who can get just compensation. As per usual your understaning is way off the mark, as to Dickmitrades and Cuntounas, doings is not the issue but where they are heading and that is hell where their frinds are - Makarios, Grivas, Yorgadjis, TPapa is waiting for them.

I did not miss anything, YFred. The IPC and the north's courts will follow the letter of the ECHR ruling in not to give any property back, but how can the ECHR excuse itself from it's own ruling, when the GCs will be asking properties that does not make the TCs homeless by returning non house properties.??

As for your vicious condemnation of the two lawyers, what the hell is that all about. You have become a real Fascists of late..??

As for the RoC, they too now will eventually use the ECHR ruling to decline giving any TC properties back and instead offer silly money too to the TCs. Since there are 4 times more GC refugees in 4 times less TC properties than the north, all the TCs properties in the south must be occupied by the GC refugees.

Your feelings for two individuals who are determined to destroy the TC economy, first the construction and now the Tourism is just beyond belief.
Never mind Kicks, carry on mate. You are doing a wonderful job at bringing the two communities together.

Wait one minute, YFred. These lawyers did not bring the case themselves, but were going about their profession. Are you going to condemn lawyers for providing a legal service to anyone who asks for it.?? Really.?? I guess all murderers should just be hung without legal representation, right.?? Even Saddam got legal representation. They represented a client in the court, that's all. If you want to blame anyone, blame the judges at the ICJ, and while you are at it, blame the judges at the ECHR as well, but not the ones just for proving their professional services.!

Did you not read the report where he said the construction industry is done now it is time to turn on tourism. You really are blind to what these court cases are about. Even ECHR has seen it. God man will you wake up. Shit will hit you in the face but because it GC you'll be saying who's are these lovely roses then?

Just answer the question and leave your pointless editorials. Must a lawyer be crucified for trying to win a case for his client. YES or NO. ???

Dude this is a strategy that has been many years in the planning by the GC lawyers - and you would not believe the authority that I have that on.

This is another case of you defending all things GC which I would not mind if you were a GC or if you defended everything TC with as much effort but you are not (so you claim) and you dont.

One idiot leaves (YFred) and then comes another idiot, DTA. Why don't you answer my question instead of giving me irrelevant and pointless shit. How does asking the question whether or not any lawyer should try to win a case for his client is being pro GC.?? You are beginning to sound ridiculous with each of your posts.!

[Viewpoint]

You still shooting the messenger Kikapu?

[DTA]

It is really not me that is sounding ridiculous it is you, I have made you look like a fool on other threads exposing your paper thin arguements and your myopic views, your unbalance and your dillusional mental state so now you are starting with insults - that is game you should not play and I very much doubt you would say that to my face,

I will give you two facts here:

1) A lawyer is duty bound to serve his clients to this best of his/her abilities
2) The oram's case was part of an "agreed" strategy that the GC lawyers (a group of elite) have been working on for many years (and I have that on great authority).

So your claim that they were just doing the best by their clients is as flawed as the majority of the claims I have seen from you thus far. But you keep it up with your mistaken belief that you 'freethinker' wear the black sheep badge, you have earned it, but for all the wrong reasons and more importantly not for the reasons that you think.

Because the person you are and the person that you think you are - from where I stand just do not match up.

[growuptcs]

It is really not me that is sounding ridiculous it is you, I have made you look like a fool on other threads exposing your paper thin arguements and your myopic views, your unbalance and your dillusional mental state so now you are starting with insults - that is game you should not play and I very much doubt you would say that to my face,

I will give you two facts here:

1) A lawyer is duty bound to serve his clients to this best of his/her abilities
2) The oram's case was part of an "agreed" strategy that the GC lawyers (a group of elite) have been working on for many years (and I have that on great authority).

So your claim that they were just doing the best by their clients is as flawed as the majority of the claims I have seen from you thus far. But you keep it up with your mistaken belief that you 'freethinker' wear the black sheep badge, you have earned it, but for all the wrong reasons and more importantly not for the reasons that you think.

Because the person you are and the person that you think you are - from where I stand just do not match up.

It is you that sounds totally ridiculous coming to this forum bouncing around your emptyheaded ways of progress. Now skip back to Cyprus44 and address your strategies where you wouldn't look like a carpetbagger, because here you sound like a criminal looking for freedom.