Cyprus-Forum.com

[Hermes]

Not trying to be argumentative here but was really looking for specifics, for example if the points that I have quoted (and they were in no order just the first two sentences of the article that you posted) were part of the reason why you voted no, could you answer my questions (which were specific to those points) so I (we) can better understand?

Not meaning to be rude but if you cared to read the rest of the article instead of quoting half a line you wouldn't need to ask such idiotic questions.

I am sorry that you find my questions idiotic, i wanted to deal with things point by point so as things dont get lost and understanding prevails.

so now can you answer my questions that I have outlined for you?

I think you should now fuck off.

[DTA]

Cypriot Annan Plan referendums, 2004

Reasons for approval by the Turkish Cypriots

Specific reasons for rejection by the Greek Cypriots


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cypriot_An ... dums,_2004

Thanks Kikapo but I am looking forSpecific Gc reasons why they rejected it.

The wiki article that you presented was very bias by theway.

[DTA]

Not trying to be argumentative here but was really looking for specifics, for example if the points that I have quoted (and they were in no order just the first two sentences of the article that you posted) were part of the reason why you voted no, could you answer my questions (which were specific to those points) so I (we) can better understand?

Not meaning to be rude but if you cared to read the rest of the article instead of quoting half a line you wouldn't need to ask such idiotic questions.

I am sorry that you find my questions idiotic, i wanted to deal with things point by point so as things dont get lost and understanding prevails.

so now can you answer my questions that I have outlined for you?

I think you should now fuck off.

Make me you pussy

[DTA]

The A plan was an absolute disgrace - Any settlement which does not give (with certain very limited exceptions) the return of property based upon pre 74 legal ownership or at the option of tht owner, compensation, whether Greek Speaking Cypriot or Turkish speaking Cypriot, (and that includes the return of property abandoned even before 1974) should not be accepted.

Fair point but how would that work in realty - the 70,000 TCs that were forced to move in 74 would now be forced to move again?

[Kikapu]

Cypriot Annan Plan referendums, 2004

Reasons for approval by the Turkish Cypriots

Specific reasons for rejection by the Greek Cypriots


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cypriot_An ... dums,_2004

Thanks Kikapo but I am looking forSpecific Gc reasons why they rejected it.

The wiki article that you presented was very bias by theway.

I think the article written by CF member Kifeas should tell you adequately why the GCs voted "NO".

But let me ask you a question, because I believe your question has been answered very adequately by all those who responded to your question.

The question to you is, why shouldn't have the GCs voted "NO" on the Annan Plan as it was presented in 2004.? Tell them where they went wrong and why. Perhaps you are seeing something where the 76% GCs missed in the AP and that you would like to bring it to their attention on what they missed.

This is what Bananiot said of the AP, but voted for it anyway. Even he didn't think it was a good plan. He voted, because he thought the next plan would be worse than the AP. Does it makes sense to vote for a bad plan now (then) without not knowing what the next plan would be, specially when the EU membership was just around the corner.?? It doesn't make any sense to me what so ever, but that was his democratic right to vote the way he felt, and so did the rest of the GCs and the TCs. Don't forget, 35% of the TCs also voted "NO" on the AP. Were they also wrong to vote "NO", and if so, why.?

The Plan itself left many things to be desired. One could almost find reasons to vote against it in every paragraph and every clause of it.

http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.p ... 4&start=30

[quattro]

The UN's so-called Annan Plan, for resolution of the Cyprus problem, evolved through five different texts. Up to Annan III the proposal was subject to negotiations with the Cypriote: it was generally acceptable to the Greek Cypriots but rejected by Denktash and his army supporters in Turkey. The final proposal, Annan V, radically changed to satisfy the wishes of the Turkish army, was not made subject to Greek Cypriot or Turkish Cypriot negotiation Its apparent objective was to secure a deal, of any sort, in advance of Cypriot accession to the EU, in such formula as would help to decriminalize Turkey's position in Cyprus and ease Turkey's path to EU accession.
Clare Palley was a legal advisor to the UN process. It has been written that no one reading her exhaustive documentation of events and statements relating to Annan V could fail to be convinced "that the rush to force a settlement on the Greek and Turkish Cypriots in 2004 was motivated and executed with deceit, stupidity and flagrant disregard for the sovereignty and freedom of peoples."

[DTA]

Cypriot Annan Plan referendums, 2004

Reasons for approval by the Turkish Cypriots

Specific reasons for rejection by the Greek Cypriots


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cypriot_An ... dums,_2004

Thanks Kikapo but I am looking forSpecific Gc reasons why they rejected it.

The wiki article that you presented was very bias by theway.

I think the article written by CF member Kifeas should tell you adequately why the GCs voted "NO".

But let me ask you a question, because I believe your question has been answered very adequately by all those who responded to your question.

The question to you is, why shouldn't have the GCs voted "NO" on the Annan Plan as it was presented in 2004.? Tell them where they went wrong and why. Perhaps you are seeing something where the 76% GCs missed in the AP and that you would like to bring it to their attention on what they missed.

This is what Bananiot said of the AP, but voted for it anyway. Even he didn't think it was a good plan. He voted, because he thought the next plan would be worse than the AP. Does it makes sense to vote for a bad plan now (then) without not knowing what the next plan would be, specially when the EU membership was just around the corner.?? It doesn't make any sense to me what so ever, but that was his democratic right to vote the way he felt, and so did the rest of the GCs and the TCs. Don't forget, 35% of the TCs also voted "NO" on the AP. Were they also wrong to vote "NO", and if so, why.?

The Plan itself left many things to be desired. One could almost find reasons to vote against it in every paragraph and every clause of it.

http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.p ... 4&start=30

Im not saying they should at all, and to be honest I dont know enough about the plan to say if it was a good or a bad plan.

some of the things I from what is written here (if they are accurate) that I completely agree that would be unacceptable would be:

That Gc cant buy land in the north - thats a joke and can never be justified

The management of Cyprus air space would have been subject to Turkey’s consent. - not sure what that was about

only 20% of Greek Cypriot refugees would be able to return over a time frame of 25 years, whereas Turkish Cypriots would have had full right of return. - again not right as this should not be done on ethnic lines - however I dont understand how this would work for GC refugees living on TC land in the ROC

The British were granted rights to unilaterally define the continental shelf and territorial waters along two base areas and to claim potential mineral rights. Under the 1959-1960 Zürich and London Agreements, Britain did not have such rights (see the 2nd annex to the Additional Protocol to the 1959 Treaty of Establishment).

Following Annan 5 plan the Greek Cypriots would not have been allowed to make up more than 6% of the population in any single village in the Turkish controlled areas in the north thus they would have been prevented from setting up their own schools for their children and would not have even been able to give birth once this quota was reached.

- how the hell do you stop people from giving birth - that cant be right, can someone point me to page of the plan where it says this?

[DTA]

The UN's so-called Annan Plan, for resolution of the Cyprus problem, evolved through five different texts. Up to Annan III the proposal was subject to negotiations with the Cypriote: it was generally acceptable to the Greek Cypriots but rejected by Denktash and his army supporters in Turkey. The final proposal, Annan V, radically changed to satisfy the wishes of the Turkish army, was not made subject to Greek Cypriot or Turkish Cypriot negotiation Its apparent objective was to secure a deal, of any sort, in advance of Cypriot accession to the EU, in such formula as would help to decriminalize Turkey's position in Cyprus and ease Turkey's path to EU accession.
Clare Palley was a legal advisor to the UN process. It has been written that no one reading her exhaustive documentation of events and statements relating to Annan V could fail to be convinced "that the rush to force a settlement on the Greek and Turkish Cypriots in 2004 was motivated and executed with deceit, stupidity and flagrant disregard for the sovereignty and freedom of peoples."

Ok fair point but I was looking at specifics, areas that could be changed and acceptable to both side, I can see how the points that I have pointed out above are not acceptable in any terms and should be removed.

[supporttheunderdog]

The A plan was an absolute disgrace - Any settlement which does not give (with certain very limited exceptions) the return of property based upon pre 74 legal ownership or at the option of tht owner, compensation, whether Greek Speaking Cypriot or Turkish speaking Cypriot, (and that includes the return of property abandoned even before 1974) should not be accepted.

Fair point but how would that work in realty - the 70,000 TCs that were forced to move in 74 would now be forced to move again?

It cuts both ways - there are a number of Greek Speaking Cypriots who were forced to move in 1974 and who may not want to move again, but who might be obliged to do so....

[ZoC]

the day before tcs take to the streets in their tens of housands to protest against turkey's clutches, DTA asks why people free from turkey's clutches voted against a plan fully endorsed by turkey.

a senior turkish diplomat taking part in the negotiations stated at the time that the turks had obtained "everything they wanted" and "it's the best possible conclusion for us."

http://www.bakutoday.net/turks-happy-greeks-gloomy.html