Cyprus-Forum.com

[Viewpoint]

EDITED for reason 4
http://www.cyprus-forum.com/cyprus1566.html

[bg_turk]

Piratis,

1. Did the so-called "Republic of Cyprus" consider the marriage between muslim Cypriots illegal before 1974, since clearly there was a law which explicitly declared such marriages to be impossible. YES OR NO?

2. The TRNC is not recognized, but its governmet is democratically elected by the Turkish Cypriots and its institutions will form a vital component of a Federated State of Cyprus in the future. In this respect I would not go that far in denouncing the significance of TRNC citizenship and I am genuinely interested in the attitude of TRNC towards the GC minority residing on its territories. I still want to know whether GC who chose to stay in the TRNC have citizenship? YES or NO?

PS. Since there was at least one more person interested in my inquiries, I decided to proceed since they can no longer be qualified as PERSONAL.

[Piratis]

Did the so-called "Republic of Cyprus" consider the marriage between muslim Cypriots illegal before 1974, since clearly there was a law which explicitly declared such marriages to be impossible. YES OR NO?

What could not be done was the marriage of a Muslim with a Christian. Probably the reason for this was that the TCs wanted it to be this way so they would not be assimilated by the GC majority.

Republic of Cyprus is a country member of the UN and EU, and is the only state in Cyprus.

The TRNC is not recognized, but its governmet is democratically elected by the Turkish Cypriots and its institutions will form a vital component of a Federated State of Cyprus in the future. In this respect I would not go that far in denouncing the significance of TRNC citizenship and I am genuinely interested in the attitude of TRNC towards the GC minority residing on its territories. I still want to know whether GC who chose to stay in the TRNC have citizenship? YES or NO?

Maybe they have maybe they don't. You have to find the 4-5 GCs that would want such thing to tell you. The rest would not waste their time for a meaningless paper.

In Cyprus there is only one state, Republic of Cyprus, and this a unitary state, not federal or anything else.

By the way, the pseudo state of the occupied areas doesn't represent anybody. It doesn't represent north Cyprus, because the great majority of the people of north Cyprus are now refugees and they do not vote in those "elections". It doesn't represent TCs either, because a big part (almost 50%) of the voters are not TCs but Turkish settlers.
The pseudo state is also a puppet state of Turkey that can not do anything without receiving the approval of Turkey.

[Viewpoint]

Piratis

By the way, the pseudo state of the occupied areas doesn't represent anybody. It doesn't represent north Cyprus, because the great majority of the people of north Cyprus are now refugees and they do not vote in those "elections". It doesn't represent TCs either, because a big part (almost 50%) of the voters are not TCs but Turkish settlers.
The pseudo state is also a puppet state of Turkey that can not do anything without receiving the approval of Turkey.

This appears to be the mentality of many GCs whether they say this out right like Piratis or hide their true thoughts, do we want a union with this mind set? 31 years has not changed this blinkered mentality another 100 will do nothing either.

[Piratis]

do we want a union

I know you don't want union, if you wanted the Cyprus problem would not exist.

And yes, I said that Talat etc does not represent TCs. How can he represent TCs when almost the 50% of the voters are settlers??? He represents TCs only partly.

[Viewpoint]

Piratis

And yes, I said that Talat etc does not represent TCs. How can he represent TCs when almost the 50% of the voters are settlers??? He represents TCs only partly.

Seeing they are TRNC citizens and have the right to vote Talat also represents them...we also have English and other nationalities who have become citizens they all voted for Talat so he represents us all.
Your arguement is ridiculous so Blair does not represent the blacks or indians in the UK??

[garbitsch]

Yes we do want union but we do not want Greek Cypriot yoke under the mask of "Cypriotness". That's what you want. Making Cyprus Greek and calling it Cypriot. We all know the meaning of Cypriotness is no different than being Cretan.

[erolz]

do we want a union

I know you don't want union, if you wanted the Cyprus problem would not exist.

Despite my attempts to not engage in continued debate with yourself for fear that it does more harm than good I can not let this comment pass.

If we (TC) had wanted union the Cyprus problem would not exist? Do you really believe that? And what do you mean by 'union'? Union of two cypriot communites in an independent Cyprus or Union of Cyprus to Greece? I can see that if we had wanted union with Greece then the cyprus problem would not exist today as it does. But to say the that the cyprus problem exists today because TC do not (and did not) want union is to me just more propaganda. In that one sweeping statement you brush aside the GC persuit of ENOSIS (not a united independent Cyprus), the acts of agression by GC and the GC state aginst TC for opposing ENOSIS and many more factors besides.

And yes, I said that Talat etc does not represent TCs. How can he represent TCs when almost the 50% of the voters are settlers??? He represents TCs only partly.

Talat is the duly democraticaly elected president of the TRNC and represents TRNC citizens. It was TC that chose / allowed through their political representatives to grant TRNC citizenship to many many Turkish mainlanders (as well as others). I know that you will lecture me on the illegailty of the TRNC and TRNC citizenship - but the fact remains that Talat was elected by TRNC citizens and represents TRNC citizens.

[bg_turk]

Piratis,

1. I quote again:
" By a letter of 28 January 1999 the Municipality of Nicosia informed the applicant that Section 34 of the Marriage Act did not provide the possibility for a Turkish Cypriot professing the Muslim faith to contract a civil marriage."
My interpretation is that this was not restricted to mixed marriages only, but to all marriages where at least one of the partners was non-christian. So did the Republic of Cyprus issue marriage certificates to TC, so that they could be considered husband and wife LEGALLY? Or was it only greeks that could have legal marriage in Cypurs?

2. It seems to me that the so-called "Republic of Cyprus" seeks all the rights that representation of TC would give her on the international level, while domestically she constantly evades the responsibilities that this bestows upon her. As citizens TC should be able to marry , should be able to vote, should be able to enjoy their property. None of these fundamental rights are granted by your government, hence the so-called "Republic of Cyprus" is no more than a Greek Republic which represents GC interests only and does not have the moral right to claim that TC are its citizens - to my eyes it is nothing more that a Greek Republic of Southern Cyprus (GRSC).

[Piratis]

Seeing they are TRNC citizens and have the right to vote Talat also represents them

So Talat represents "TRNC" which is an illegal pseudo state and not the TC community alone. So the question is: Whose interests is this person serving? Obviously not just the interests of TCs who is supposedly serving when he goes to the negotiations.

If we (TC) had wanted union the Cyprus problem would not exist?

Today no. I am not saying that TCs are responsible alone for the creation of the problem. What I am saying is that today TCs do not want a real union, they want partition (or disguised one like Annan plan).