Acikgoz wrote:Pyrpolizer wrote:Acikgoz wrote:Regarding refugees, I guess the question must then be raised pyrpo, how's it working out for them as a whole 6 years on and for the forseable future? Pretty big gamble, and hey, don't ask a lawyer to advise you when his fees are at stake, there may be an element of self interest - but call me cynical.
It was not always a lawyer but someone well educated 99% of the times it was a co-villager, most propably half the villagers were his relatives, and there was absolutely no fee, just explanation of what the Anan Plan. A hope you understand what an association of refugees from say Assia village is...
Regarding your question as to how is it working now 6 years after, we feel we are better off than what we would be with the Anan Plan.
I'd venture not so good for the refugees specifically which was my point - GCs on the whole may feel better about the situation. I focused on the refugees given it is the most aggressive point made on this forum, justifiably, as they have had a tangible removed from their possession - not the political pariahs of partisan demands. If I am wrong on this front, and the refugees see themselves better off as you put it, then it really turns the issues we find ourselves facing on its head, the political standing of the RoC thus wholly becoming the dominant issue and property return secondary.
Can you therefore clarify further if you feel you have enough understanding of the majority view of the refugees.
I said they are better off because they haven't signed giving away their properties on exchange of some silly bonds (do you know anything about stock markets) and secondly they still have a healthy state and a healthy economy running.
With the Anan Plan refugees & non refugees would lose it all. That's what we thought and that's how we voted.For your information almost all families today are a mixture of refugees+non refugees. The decision was collective.