Cyprus-Forum.com

[Oracle]

I started off this thread with something about Varosha and once again it has reverted to people slagging each other off with nasty accusations-I'm really sorry because I have met people on both sides during my stay here who I really liked and respect.All I can say is that this island has a very bad karma and until people are genuinely prepared to forgive each other for the past this viscious circle of misery will continue.......you can only lead a horse to the well but you cannot make it drink!
All this bickering about owning this and that is a reflection of this narrow thinking,unless you have discovered the secret of how to live this life for ever?
Of course the truth is that nobody really owns anything,they just take temporary possession of it!You are all slaves to your illusions and your devils....

Cymart, why don't you admit that your sole interest in Cyprus is to get your hands on your wife's property?

[Paphitis]

..is a sign of lack of control and a lack of knowledge of the correct words,as I was taught at school.......

It is also a sign of someone so frustrated with a person who is so willing to disadvantage ALL Cypriots just so that they can get their property back. How selfish can someone get?

But I don't mind someone bringing up how Varosha was abandoned on the 14 th of August 1974 by most of its inhabitants after they discovered that the army,police and most other authorities had already left them defenceless!!

The point is, the Turkish Army was never intending to take control of Varoshia, and would not have done so if the city was not abandoned. They only cordoned off the city since it was abandoned, so that they can use it as a bargaining chip for creating 2 states.

The CNG and Police were busy fighting the Turkish Invaders elsewhere, and resources were already stretched. They were also ill equipped.

This is one of the biggest scandals of the 1974 war and I had the priveledge of working in Limassol for a number of years with the late Demetris Kayiatos who organised a civil defence batallion/emergency hospital at great personal risk with some other brave people at the Marcos Hotel in Stavros.Please do not blame the civilians of Famagusta for leaving after tyhe authorities had already done so!

And what did they achieve? Did they stay and defend, or did they run when they saw the Turkish Army advance towards the walled city? No, they abandoned the city and Turkey cordoned off the entire area.

But I am not going to keep arguing with Paphitis about the other points because it seems that other prominent people have similar views to me such as Nicos Rolandis,former Presidents Clerides and Vasiliou to name just a few....or does he consider they are all wrong too?

The Annan Plan was rejected by a 76% majority, so all the people you mention above are indeed wrong!

Or are you saying that 76% of all GCs are stupid and wrong?

As for quite a few of the Paphians,I am by no means the first person to have have remarked about their pseudo-patriotic attitude and the same applies to other towns on this side-for example Rina Catselli even wrote the same about people in Limassol in her book which she wrote in 1975.Yiannis Vrahimis also analyses the problem in his book 'Daimon tis kyprou.'Losing everything to a visible enemy is bad enough but being shafted by people who are supposedly on your own side is even worse...

Pseudo Patriots are those that abandoned their city, gifting it to the Turks and then demand that their countrymen make significant concessions which will see them lose basic fundamental Political and Human Rights just so that they can benefit financially by getting their property back. Shameful!

Some Paphians voted in favour of the Annan Plan, most did not! That is their democratic right! They don't have to make concessions which will make their lives unbearable so that you can get your property back.

[cymart]

I totally reject your allegations-if I cared only about supposedly returning to my wifes family property,as you both allege,I would not waste so much time trying to respond to other postings on this forum?
I do agree that there were people in Paphos-including some quite prominent and well-known ones-who did vote yes in the referendum because they had the foresight to understand the advantages, despite its many problematic aspects and also because they knew,as has been proven, that we were leaping over a cliff into an unknown depth by rejecting it,as Clerides re-iterated only last week...where is the so-called 'European solution' which Papad. and his supporters promised us we would get instead?Try reading the article by Kostas Nanos in 'Adesmevtos'-he is another person with logical and sensible ideas.
Another point I have made before is that in 2005,Papadopoulos and all the parties made an agreement on a number of articles which needed to be re-negotiated to make the Anna Plan acceptable to this side and as he admitted,all previous plans which have been submitted always stay on the negotiating table......
I was fortunately not here during the weeks before the referendum but have heard how mass-hysteria and mis-information were used to terrify people about the consequences of accepting it and the church leadership and most of the media were used to drive the message home,plus financial support from more than a few businesses,including developers of course!
Public opinion can easily be manipulated and often has been-look how many Germans supported Hitler when he first came to power???
As for Hatters question about the Katyn forest,my Polish relatives,who were also Jews,never held grudges about any race or nation,any more than it is right to blame the present day Russians for committing the massacre at Katyn.But Russia is another country that has never really come to terms with its past and this is never a good omen as history can repeat itself!
Finally,Clerides,Vasiliou,Rolandis etc etc. why do you so strongly oppose their views-you have never coherently and logocally explained why?Why do they worry you so much?

[Paphitis]

I totally reject your allegations-if I cared only about supposedly returning to my wifes family property,as you both allege,I would not waste so much time trying to respond to other postings on this forum?

It's obvious so just come clean. Most Varoshiotes voted Yes to the Annan Plan because they based their decision on financial grounds since they were going to get their properties back.

Most other Cypriots voted No because they based their decision on Political and Security concerns.

It is a s simple as that.

I do agree that there were people in Paphos-including some quite prominent and well-known ones-who did vote yes in the referendum because they had the foresight to understand the advantages, despite its many problematic aspects and also because they knew,as has been proven, that we were leaping over a cliff into an unknown depth by rejecting it,as Clerides re-iterated only last week...where is the so-called 'European solution' which Papad. and his supporters promised us we would get instead?Try reading the article by Kostas Nanos in 'Adesmevtos'-he is another person with logical and sensible ideas.

Papadopoulos made no such promises. He only stated that he would seek a just and viable solution based on EU Principles but never made any promises to the people that he would achieve this. What a ludicrous statement.

Furthermore, the Annan Plan is not an option for me. Ceding control of the RoC's EEZ, restrictions on freedom of movement and the right to reside anywhere, watered down human and democratic rights, the presence of foreign troops in perpetuity, would force me to turn my back on Cyprus, an island I have an attachment to going back some 10,000 years or more. It was not a 'solution' and was rightfully rejected.

Legalised Partition on the other hand, based on 80:20, is in my opinion, a far better solution and is the kind of solution that has half a chance of being accepted by the RoC electorate. I would probably support such a proposal. But if others do not, then I would accept it and always support the decision of the overwhelming majority.

Another point I have made before is that in 2005,Papadopoulos and all the parties made an agreement on a number of articles which needed to be re-negotiated to make the Anna Plan acceptable to this side and as he admitted,all previous plans which have been submitted always stay on the negotiating table......

The overwhelming majority rejected the Annan Plan. Even the Annan Plan itself specifically stated that it will never be tabled again if any of the 2 communities reject it.

Any Confederacy Plan that will be put before the people will be rejected once again. Christofias knows this only too well.

I was fortunately not here during the weeks before the referendum but have heard how mass-hysteria and mis-information were used to terrify people about the consequences of accepting it and the church leadership and most of the media were used to drive the message home,plus financial support from more than a few businesses,including developers of course!

If such a system of Governance was to be introduced in Australia, there would be mass hysteria here as well.

There was no misinformation at all. Many ludicrous aspects of the Annan Plan are well known, and GCs made the right decision. Even some TCs stated that they would not endorse the Annan Plan if they were GCs.

Public opinion can easily be manipulated and often has been-look how many Germans supported Hitler when he first came to power???

The Annan Plan was looked into in quite some detail and at the end of the day, many negative aspects were exposed. The GCs based their decision on specific political and security concerns which are well documented.

As for Hatters question about the Katyn forest,my Polish relatives,who were also Jews,never held grudges about any race or nation,any more than it is right to blame the present day Russians for committing the massacre at Katyn.But Russia is another country that has never really come to terms with its past and this is never a good omen as history can repeat itself!

Irrelevant!

Finally,Clerides,Vasiliou,Rolandis etc etc. why do you so strongly oppose their views-you have never coherently and logocally explained why?Why do they worry you so much?

I don't strongly oppose them or their views. They are entitled to their views and opinions.

I opposed The Annan Plan and I based my decision on good cold facts which I believed would have disadvantaged Cyprus and all GCs. The Annan Plan would have been the end of my long attachment to Cyprus going back some 10,000 years or more. The place would never exist anymore. I would just sell assets and shift to another country nearby, probably Greece!

[cymart]

Despite what you might imagine,I usually get along o.k. with most people and try to avoid arguments with anybody.
Actually I also know people from Famagusta who voted against the Annan Plan for various reasons.....
I would be interested to know how you perceive the views of people who I mentioned such as Clerides,Vasiliou etc and why you insist that what they say is wrong,according to your ideas?
I also disagree that what I wrote about Katyn is irrelevant becazuse I was replying to a question by somebody else about that particular issue.
Further more I also consider your allegations that you would have to leave Cyprus if the Annan Plan was accepted as way over the top and nothing more than scare-mongering,especially as the whole island would have actively joined the E.U. and if any problems had occurred they would have been directly and actively liable to resolve them?I also cannot understand why you say you would have to go to Greece when they are so many other countries you could choose if you decided to leave Cyprus??
Using your logic,should I go to the city of Lviv for example,now in Ukraine but in Poland until 1945 and find where my ancestors once lived(if the buildings survived the war) and then tell the present inhabitants to get out because my grandfather once lived there and he owned the place then?Or ask them to pay me for loss of use and damages to the property since then?
On a final point for now,many people who came to the south as refugees in 1974 found that the majority of people on this side behaved as if life was normal for them and nothing was wrong....ever since it has become even more than 'normal' for them and more than a few have benefited enormously!
I can still remember my wifes uncle from Karpasia who was still living in a tent with his family at Lefkaritis camp in Larnaca when we visited them in 1975.(Next year they got permission to emigrate to Canada where he had a brother living permanently.)He told us of people experiences during the winter when it was cold and raining and how they had been treated by some people from Larnaca who were not refugees and who exploited the situation by selling them all kinds of goods which the Red Cross aid did not provide....I can still remember him telling me on the last day before we went home to England not to even think of coming to Cyprus unless there was a solution,but he said he thought,even then that we would never return to Karpasia to live and he regretted to say that it was not only because of the Turks,but also because there were some rotten people on this side too who didn't give a damn about anything but their own interests!

[YFred]

Despite what you might imagine,I usually get along o.k. with most people and try to avoid arguments with anybody.
Actually I also know people from Famagusta who voted against the Annan Plan for various reasons.....
I would be interested to know how you perceive the views of people who I mentioned such as Clerides,Vasiliou etc and why you insist that what they say is wrong,according to your ideas?
I also disagree that what I wrote about Katyn is irrelevant becazuse I was replying to a question by somebody else about that particular issue.
Further more I also consider your allegations that you would have to leave Cyprus if the Annan Plan was accepted as way over the top and nothing more than scare-mongering,especially as the whole island would have actively joined the E.U. and if any problems had occurred they would have been directly and actively liable to resolve them?I also cannot understand why you say you would have to go to Greece when they are so many other countries you could choose if you decided to leave Cyprus??
Using your logic,should I go to the city of Lviv for example,now in Ukraine but in Poland until 1945 and find where my ancestors once lived(if the buildings survived the war) and then tell the present inhabitants to get out because my grandfather once lived there and he owned the place then?Or ask them to pay me for loss of use and damages to the property since then?
On a final point for now,many people who came to the south as refugees in 1974 found that the majority of people on this side behaved as if life was normal for them and nothing was wrong....ever since it has become even more than 'normal' for them and more than a few have benefited enormously!
I can still remember my wifes uncle from Karpasia who was still living in a tent with his family at Lefkaritis camp in Larnaca when we visited them in 1975.(Next year they got permission to emigrate to Canada where he had a brother living permanently.)He told us of people experiences during the winter when it was cold and raining and how they had been treated by some people from Larnaca who were not refugees and who exploited the situation by selling them all kinds of goods which the Red Cross aid did not provide....I can still remember him telling me on the last day before we went home to England not to even think of coming to Cyprus unless there was a solution,but he said he thought,even then that we would never return to Karpasia to live and he regretted to say that it was not only because of the Turks,but also because there were some rotten people on this side too who didn't give a damn about anything but their own interests!

Don't let the bastards get to you. They have never been in a war and never been shot at. The moment they find themselves in that situation they will crap in their vragas.

[georgios100]

My personal opinion, the Anan plan was rightfully rejected. This plan was by far not accommodating many issues, political, economical and social. It was drafted quickly amongst biased participants and contained many grey and unfair areas, not really solving the problem but rather complicating it, especially when it came to the actual implementation. My family members and me voted NO, although we all are refugees from Varoshia.

During the referendum to the Anan plan, the vote was indeed influenced by many which have not read the details but merely obey the President's "orders" to reject it outright. I wonder, if the president allowed the population to vote at will, what the result would be. Personally, I still believe the plan would be rejected but the president's speech just prior to the vote was out of place and in a way wrongful. A clear violation of the Democratic procedures governing our island.

A referendum is a risky business. Any solution in the future proposed for vote has a percentage of approval or disapproval, regardless if the plan is "good" or not. Ordinary citizens cannot understand the content of the text of the proposed solution. Even lawyers have difficulty to comprehend certain segments as some areas of the Anan plan had. Again, the voters will be influenced by their politicians or president who, apparently "knows better". The result... Cyprob can last for centuries! Some people on this forum think Turkey might just give-up and surrender an extremely favorable solution for our side (the GC side), in order to clear the way for a successful entry into the EU. I don't share this "hope". It would be a mistake to put all our eggs into this particular basket as I see this "hope" to be unpredictable, to say the least.

To avoid the referendum "hazards", I posted another option for solution known as Binding Arbitration.
Link
http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.php?t=29689

Take a look. This option might be worth investigating, pending the upcoming new talks, most likely to fail again. Beware, this option eliminates the referendum, seen by a many as a violation of their right to vote. I don't blame them at all for rejecting this option but, in order the have a breakthrough to the deadlock of Cyprob, it might just equal the risk of a referendum it self.

Bear in mind, I consider Binding Arbitration, as a last ditch effort, after all other options have been exhausted.

Georgios100

[B25]

George, I dont understand your persistance in this method. We were very nearly shafted with the Ankara Plan that had so much external influence. Imagine if this BA you seek was to be subjected to the same influnce, which it will.
We would lose our country to the turks. Is that what you are trying to achieve? Because from where i am standing you are trying to push us into a corner. Its no wonder some here are suspicious of your real identity.
As for Tpap, he saved Cyprus from hell and he should be considered a hero and not demonised. He kept us from being gangbanged by turkey, uk and us.
I for one am glad he did what he did otherwise we would all be withs arms today at war and not a progressive EU nation.
Please stop this idea of BA, it is not failsafe we would be heading for disaster.
We are not prepared to legalise turkieys legalities just like that.
Hade kanei.

[cymart]

After more than thirty five years the Cyprus problem has become almost a career for more than a few politicians,lawyers etc etc and its continuation keeps them busy-and earning money!When something has existed for a long time,vested interests always develop from it and the status-quo guarantees their existence....
I also agree that the way Papadopoulos aired his desperate plea was not a fair and objective presentation of the ins and outs of the proposed solution, but the culmination of several months of orchestrated campaigning against it by most of the media,the church and other supporters he had rallied after he found himself in a difficult position when Turkey sidelined Denktash and Erdogan accepted it!The attitude of Christophias in particular was very suspicious at that time and gave the impression he was afraid of the AKEL losing its share in the government if he opposed Papadopoulos and the plan was then rejected in the referendum!He was largely responsible too for Clerides defeat in 2003,also ostensibly because AKEL was more interested in a share in power than a solution to the Cyprus question...but all that is history now and we are paying the price.
Asking people to take the responsibility for such a momentous decision about a very complex plan that an average person would have neither the time or probably neither the ability to interpret and understand and then vote in a referendum was a very bad decision by the U.N. and it should have been at least postponed until people here had a better opportunity to debate and analyse is implications in simplified terms,ideally with independent presentations that did not have a vested interest in either its adoption or rejection.It is clear from the postings here that these opinions and interests exist on both sides and will still influence any future referendum that is held for the same purpose.Political leaders are elected to take responsibility and often have to make decisions which may be unpopular with some people when it is in the long-term interest of the country.If a leader does not have the charisma and vision to see 'outside the box' and take the risk of making such crucial decisions then he is not a leader, but merely a political opportunist who puts his personal interests first in holding onto power!Such figures have been relatively few throughout world history and it is highly debatable whether Cyprus has ever had one!Shoving the responsibility onto the people after waging a biased campaign using state machinery as well is definitely not an example of good leadership!

[georgios100]

After more than thirty five years the Cyprus problem has become almost a career for more than a few politicians,lawyers etc etc and its continuation keeps them busy-and earning money!When something has existed for a long time,vested interests always develop from it and the status-quo guarantees their existence....
I also agree that the way Papadopoulos aired his desperate plea was not a fair and objective presentation of the ins and outs of the proposed solution, but the culmination of several months of orchestrated campaigning against it by most of the media,the church and other supporters he had rallied after he found himself in a difficult position when Turkey sidelined Denktash and Erdogan accepted it!The attitude of Christophias in particular was very suspicious at that time and gave the impression he was afraid of the AKEL losing its share in the government if he opposed Papadopoulos and the plan was then rejected in the referendum!He was largely responsible too for Clerides defeat in 2003,also ostensibly because AKEL was more interested in a share in power than a solution to the Cyprus question...but all that is history now and we are paying the price.
Asking people to take the responsibility for such a momentous decision about a very complex plan that an average person would have neither the time or probably neither the ability to interpret and understand and then vote in a referendum was a very bad decision by the U.N. and it should have been at least postponed until people here had a better opportunity to debate and analyse is implications in simplified terms,ideally with independent presentations that did not have a vested interest in either its adoption or rejection.It is clear from the postings here that these opinions and interests exist on both sides and will still influence any future referendum that is held for the same purpose.Political leaders are elected to take responsibility and often have to make decisions which may be unpopular with some people when it is in the long-term interest of the country.If a leader does not have the charisma and vision to see 'outside the box' and take the risk of making such crucial decisions then he is not a leader, but merely a political opportunist who puts his personal interests first in holding onto power!Such figures have been relatively few throughout world history and it is highly debatable whether Cyprus has ever had one!Shoving the responsibility onto the people after waging a biased campaign using state machinery as well is definitely not an example of good leadership!

You "touch" political taboos which are out of bounds by many on this forum Cymart. Many of the points you make are valid & true. I too agree, our political leaders are gutless and don't have the boldness required to do the job. Expect attacks from various hardliners on this forum who are certain, the only ones to blame are the TCs and people like you & me, who can "see" things in a different way than they do. A neutral view of examining the situation cannot be tolerated but only labeled as Turkish propaganda! A narrow minded phenomenon, common in Cyprus, I'm afraid.

You either go by their "line" or you are trash. They are right, we are wrong, end of story. If you decide to post anything else, you are considered a traitor of Cyprus. These hardliners are ruthless and bias against anyone who would dare to disagree with them. They always resort to foul and inflammatory language to put their point across, thinking they won the argument by doing that. A sad story really.

In the end, cooler heads shall prevail, the solution will come in some sort of a compromise, leaving the hardliners still smoldering because things did not work out their way. Let me remind all hardliners, from both sides, you will not get your way, simply because your demands are impossible to meet.