Cyprus-Forum.com

[kurupetos]

Obviously you to know nothing just a lot of hot air.

Eventually they will collect you.

[ZoC]

Obviously you to know nothing just a lot of hot air.

Eventually they will collect you.

he's certainly become a collectors item,,,

[Kikapu]

In short, giving back 50% of the north back to the GCs = majority TCs in the north, hence 50% power in the upper house.!

Your cunning is beyond belief, you`ll stop at nothing to sell us out,

Oh, shut up you brainless twit !

even if we were to return 50% of disputed land its does not automatically mean that those TCs living in the returned area will all move into the TC state, where does that leave your once again proven and exposed sell out plan?

First of all, there are no "disputed land" in the north. All the land is spoken for by their original owners. There are stolen land, but not disputed land. Are you saying your house is on disputed land ?

Secondly, TCs can live anywhere they want, because it will be a free country for them to choose to live in the north state or the south state. If the land they own and live on now should become part of the south state and they choose to stay in the south state, then it tells me that they are not concerned for their safety or who represents them in the government, so what's the problem. If they want to move to the north state because they have concerns, then they will do so, so mind your own bloody business. If they choose to stay in the south state, then that means you will need less land in the north, not more in order to have a majority TCs there.

Whether the TC state is 25% or 18% the GCs can if they wish take the one seat necessary to leave TCs out in the cold once again.

That's just a propaganda from you and you keep changing your position on that like a the weather. One day you say that the GCs will never want to come and live under a TC administration, which majority will not, specially if they do not have property there to live in, then the next day you make stories about the GCs flooding the north state. If the GCs are going to go to the north state at all, they will only do so if they already have property there, therefore, the least amount of property owned by the GCs are in the north state, the least number of GCs would want to be in the north state.

As for the north losing a senate seat to a GC can and will ONLY happen if you keep too much of their land and property in the north, which they will come in force to populate the north, that in time, they will turn the Federal state into a Unitary state, just because there will be just as many GCs in the north state as there are TCs. In any case, losing any number of seats in the upper house's senate means nothing, because the Federal Constitution would be already written and cannot be changed unless both north and south states agree to it with an overwhelming majority from both states, .If you are so concerned, you can ask for the "grandfathered-in clause" as a derogation. If you have concerns, then use it.

In fact 37% would be our best option as it would at least guarantee that 99.9% of TCs would remain in the TC state. thus meaning the GCs would need over 200,000 to move north whereas in your "give the GCs what they want on a plate plan" they would only need less than 50,000. No one has come out in support of your plan so throw it in the bin no one is interested in selling out the TCs except yourself.

I personally don't care if the north state is 37%, as long as the 200,000 GCs will have the right to return to their properties, as well as have their Democratic and Human Rights respected, which means that they will be able to vote and run for any office they want in the north. They will in fact outnumber the TCs, including the 50,000 settlers given Cypriot citizenships. Therefore, that won't be allowed to happen by the UN, which means you will need to return enough land back that would leave the north state a majority TCs. You will also need to consider the number of TCs who will want to live in the south state. The more TCs willing to vacate the north to return to their properties in the south would mean even smaller state in the north, and if you really want to protect the north states senate seats, then you need to make the north state even smaller. You don't have a choice. The more GC land you keep the more GCs are likely to move to the north state. If there is already large minority GCs living in the north, then a lot more will move to the north eventually which will dilute the TC majority. Are you willing to take that risk.? The smaller the north state with least amount of GC properties, the least number of GCs will want to move to the north state, which means you will maintain a majority TCs as well as all the upper house seats. Keeping 37% is a sure way for the north to lose the north to the GCs in a very short time, which will bring about a Unitary state that you don't want, because the TCs numbers are not there against the 200,000 GCs numbers, because you will not be allowed to make all the settlers into a Cypriot. BBF + EU Principles means no AP kind of a settlement. If you try to get too greedy with the GCs land in the north by trying to keep it, you will pay the price.

[B25]

Kiks, pure logic, bravo.

Dunno why this VP person does not understand plain English.

Please propose this to Pres X. Maybe you already have

You should be on the advisory council.

[Kikapu]

Kiks, pure logic, bravo.

Dunno why this VP person does not understand plain English.

Please propose this to Pres X. Maybe you already have

You should be on the advisory council.

The problem with VP and all his NeoPartirtionist friends is, that they still have wet dreams of the Annan Plan coming back for a settlement, therefore, by trying to hold onto as much of the GC land in the north to become part of the north state, they hope that they can one day secede from the BBF union with their Taksim Dreams and take all that GC land with them. That's why it is important to have BBF, a True Federation with EU Principles to prevent such thing from happening. VP is just frustrated like a desperate housewife, that his long term plans are exposed by me.

[Viewpoint]

kikapu

Oh, shut up you brainless twit !

Name calling is easy and I am much better at it than you so do you really want to do down that path....you fucking moron!!!!!

First of all, there are no "disputed land" in the north. All the land is spoken for by their original owners. There are stolen land, but not disputed land. Are you saying your house is on disputed land ?

Why do I have to go through the GC courts to get my land if it not disputed?

Secondly, TCs can live anywhere they want, because it will be a free country for them to choose to live in the north state or the south state. If the land they own and live on now should become part of the south state and they choose to stay in the south state, then it tells me that they are not concerned for their safety or who represents them in the government, so what's the problem. If they want to move to the north state because they have concerns, then they will do so, so mind your own bloody business. If they choose to stay in the south state, then that means you will need less land in the north, not more in order to have a majority TCs there.

Wouldnt you just love that, you are yet again trying to sell us out by weakening our position forcing us into refugee status yet again.

That's just a propaganda from you and you keep changing your position on that like a the weather. One day you say that the GCs will never want to come and live under a TC administration, which majority will not, specially if they do not have property there to live in, then the next day you make stories about the GCs flooding the north state. If the GCs are going to go to the north state at all, they will only do so if they already have property there, therefore, the least amount of property owned by the GCs are in the north state, the least number of GCs would want to be in the north state.

25% no less take it or leave it.

As for the north losing a senate seat to a GC can and will ONLY happen if you keep too much of their land and property in the north, which they will come in force to populate the north, that in time, they will turn the Federal state into a Unitary state, just because there will be just as many GCs in the north state as there are TCs. In any case, losing any number of seats in the upper house's senate means nothing, because the Federal Constitution would be already written and cannot be changed unless both north and south states agree to it with an overwhelming majority from both states, .If you are so concerned, you can ask for the "grandfathered-in clause" as a derogation. If you have concerns, then use it.

Another sell out and you contradict yourself by saying that losing power in the upper house "means nothing" because the federal law is already written but can only be changed by the majority in which that would be the GCs. Once again your mask has dropped you are trying to sell us out and give the whole island to the GCs, nothing you say should be trusted or taken seriously by the TCs.

I personally don't care if the north state is 37%, as long as the 200,000 GCs will have the right to return to their properties, as well as have their Democratic and Human Rights respected, which means that they will be able to vote and run for any office they want in the north. They will in fact outnumber the TCs, including the 50,000 settlers given Cypriot citizenships. Therefore, that won't be allowed to happen by the UN, which means you will need to return enough land back that would leave the north state a majority TCs. You will also need to consider the number of TCs who will want to live in the south state. The more TCs willing to vacate the north to return to their properties in the south would mean even smaller state in the north, and if you really want to protect the north states senate seats, then you need to make the north state even smaller. You don't have a choice. The more GC land you keep the more GCs are likely to move to the north state. If there is already large minority GCs living in the north, then a lot more will move to the north eventually which will dilute the TC majority. Are you willing to take that risk.? The smaller the north state with least amount of GC properties, the least number of GCs will want to move to the north state, which means you will maintain a majority TCs as well as all the upper house seats. Keeping 37% is a sure way for the north to lose the north to the GCs in a very short time, which will bring about a Unitary state that you don't want, because the TCs numbers are not there against the 200,000 GCs numbers, because you will not be allowed to make all the settlers into a Cypriot. BBF + EU Principles means no AP kind of a settlement. If you try to get too greedy with the GCs land in the north by trying to keep it, you will pay the price.

25% no less and we will take our chances with a built in guarantee at federal level of a % vote from TCs and GCs MPs to pass bills.

The problem with VP and all his NeoPartirtionist friends is, that they still have wet dreams of the Annan Plan coming back for a settlement, therefore, by trying to hold onto as much of the GC land in the north to become part of the north state, they hope that they can one day secede from the BBF union with their Taksim Dreams and take all that GC land with them. That's why it is important to have BBF, a True Federation with EU Principles to prevent such thing from happening. VP is just frustrated like a desperate housewife, that his long term plans are exposed by me.

We keep repeating the same thing the foundations of the AP or call it what you wish will be used to find a solution, alterations to gain a GC yes without losing the TC yes is whats being hammered out right now, how far they will go to please the GCs may backfire and lose the TC support...looks like it may be a May 2012 referendum. I no longer believe we will find a solution as I have said many time the chasm is just to wide to bridge, the best we can expect is more of the same and yet another failed attempt at finding a solution......lets hope the GCs say NO at the polls yet again.

[Kikapu]

Oh, shut up you brainless twit !

Name calling is easy and I am much better at it than you so do you really want to do down that path....you fucking moron!!!!!

But of course you are, because you Fascists live in the sewer.

First of all, there are no "disputed land" in the north. All the land is spoken for by their original owners. There are stolen land, but not disputed land. Are you saying your house is on disputed land ?

Why do I have to go through the GC courts to get my land if it not disputed?

That's just to stop you from "Double Dipping", that's why. Has anyone issued another deeds to your property in the south as you have done to GCs properties in the north.? The answer is a NO.!

Secondly, TCs can live anywhere they want, because it will be a free country for them to choose to live in the north state or the south state. If the land they own and live on now should become part of the south state and they choose to stay in the south state, then it tells me that they are not concerned for their safety or who represents them in the government, so what's the problem. If they want to move to the north state because they have concerns, then they will do so, so mind your own bloody business. If they choose to stay in the south state, then that means you will need less land in the north, not more in order to have a majority TCs there.

Wouldnt you just love that, you are yet again trying to sell us out by weakening our position forcing us into refugee status yet again.

So you now want to dictate to the TCs where they can live and where they cannot, is that it.? So you are not willing to let go of the old TMT tactics in wanting to tell the TCs what to do. What's next on your agenda, "Turks buy from Turks".? Is there any doubt of you being a Fascist.? Thank God the AP never passed, or else the lives of the average TCs would have been hell under you Fascists. The truth is, many TCs will leave the north state to go back to their "roots" in Cyprus. Aren't you the one who always talks about going back to your roots.? Why shouldn't the rest of the TCs, or does it only apply to you.?

That's just a propaganda from you and you keep changing your position on that like a the weather. One day you say that the GCs will never want to come and live under a TC administration, which majority will not, specially if they do not have property there to live in, then the next day you make stories about the GCs flooding the north state. If the GCs are going to go to the north state at all, they will only do so if they already have property there, therefore, the least amount of property owned by the GCs are in the north state, the least number of GCs would want to be in the north state.

25% no less take it or leave it.

Well, it is nice to see that you see some reality in what I have been talking about that you would need to return most of the the north back if you want to retain a TC majority. 25% is far less than what you really want and stated, which is 37% and even what the AP gave you, which was 29% and about the same for a land for recognition at 25%. Slowly but surely you are beginning to see the light and the logic in what I have been saying about the land reduction in the north. Who ever said you cannot teach an old dog new tricks. The more logic you see in my proposal, the easier it will become for you to go down to the 20% area, give or take 1%-2%.

As for the north losing a senate seat to a GC can and will ONLY happen if you keep too much of their land and property in the north, which they will come in force to populate the north, that in time, they will turn the Federal state into a Unitary state, just because there will be just as many GCs in the north state as there are TCs. In any case, losing any number of seats in the upper house's senate means nothing, because the Federal Constitution would be already written and cannot be changed unless both north and south states agree to it with an overwhelming majority from both states, .If you are so concerned, you can ask for the "grandfathered-in clause" as a derogation. If you have concerns, then use it.

Another sell out and you contradict yourself by saying that losing power in the upper house "means nothing" because the federal law is already written but can only be changed by the majority in which that would be the GCs. Once again your mask has dropped you are trying to sell us out and give the whole island to the GCs, nothing you say should be trusted or taken seriously by the TCs.

I'm telling you the dangers of the TCs losing their majority if you do not give most of the north back. If you give up at least 50% of it, then I'm sure you can ask for derogation on the "Grandfathered-in Population" clause if you have any concerns, which I'm sure the GCs will give it to you. The only way you are going to lose any upper house seats and the TC majority in the north state, is if you do not return most of the GCs land back to them for them to remain in the south state. If you get too greedy, the GCs will not agree to any derogation, specially the one on "Grandfathered-in Population" in which case, there will come a time where you will not only lose the upper seats, but the whole north state, which Cyprus will eventually become a Unitary state. That's what I call a "road kill". Be smart and return most of their GCs land back if you want to have a long future in keeping the north mostly a TC majority state or risk Cyprus becoming a Unitary state in not too distant future.

I personally don't care if the north state is 37%, as long as the 200,000 GCs will have the right to return to their properties, as well as have their Democratic and Human Rights respected, which means that they will be able to vote and run for any office they want in the north. They will in fact outnumber the TCs, including the 50,000 settlers given Cypriot citizenships. Therefore, that won't be allowed to happen by the UN, which means you will need to return enough land back that would leave the north state a majority TCs. You will also need to consider the number of TCs who will want to live in the south state. The more TCs willing to vacate the north to return to their properties in the south would mean even smaller state in the north, and if you really want to protect the north states senate seats, then you need to make the north state even smaller. You don't have a choice. The more GC land you keep the more GCs are likely to move to the north state. If there is already large minority GCs living in the north, then a lot more will move to the north eventually which will dilute the TC majority. Are you willing to take that risk.? The smaller the north state with least amount of GC properties, the least number of GCs will want to move to the north state, which means you will maintain a majority TCs as well as all the upper house seats. Keeping 37% is a sure way for the north to lose the north to the GCs in a very short time, which will bring about a Unitary state that you don't want, because the TCs numbers are not there against the 200,000 GCs numbers, because you will not be allowed to make all the settlers into a Cypriot. BBF + EU Principles means no AP kind of a settlement. If you try to get too greedy with the GCs land in the north by trying to keep it, you will pay the price.

25% no less and we will take our chances with a built in guarantee at federal level of a % vote from TCs and GCs MPs to pass bills.

I don't believe you will get such a guarantee. It will be "political equality" of the states and not the community, therefore you will not get 50% say so in passing any bill. Only those who vote in the upper house and the lower house with a majority will get a bill passed. You can only retain that 50% of TC votes in the government if you retain an overwhelming TC majority in the north. At 25%, it will not give you an overwhelming TC majority in the north. More like 2 to 1, assuming of course most of the TCs do decide to live in the north state, which I do not believe they will after some period of time, then what are you going to do. You will risk the north being close to being only 60-40 in TCs favour. That will not be enough to keep a GCs from being in the upper house senate seat in the north state, and eventually, you will lose the state with more GCs arriving. Don't say I didn't warn you!

The problem with VP and all his NeoPartirtionist friends is, that they still have wet dreams of the Annan Plan coming back for a settlement, therefore, by trying to hold onto as much of the GC land in the north to become part of the north state, they hope that they can one day secede from the BBF union with their Taksim Dreams and take all that GC land with them. That's why it is important to have BBF, a True Federation with EU Principles to prevent such thing from happening. VP is just frustrated like a desperate housewife, that his long term plans are exposed by me.

We keep repeating the same thing the foundations of the AP or call it what you wish will be used to find a solution, alterations to gain a GC yes without losing the TC yes is whats being hammered out right now, how far they will go to please the GCs may backfire and lose the TC support...looks like it may be a May 2012 referendum. I no longer believe we will find a solution as I have said many time the chasm is just to wide to bridge, the best we can expect is more of the same and yet another failed attempt at finding a solution......lets hope the GCs say NO at the polls yet again.

You can call it anything you want. You want to call it Annan Plan VI, so be it. It is not the cover of the book I care about, but it's content. If you say that May of 2012 is when the next referendum is going to be, then that would be about 4 years for the length of this settlement talks and maybe about 150 meetings in total, and if you think all this time is wasted just to make some superficial changes to AP of 2004, then you are going to be very disappointed. A new BBF plan without the settler factor voting to steal the TCs vote, the TCs will vote YES for a True Federation with Democracy, Human Rights, International Laws and the EU Principles, specially now that they have seen what turkey has been doing to them as well as their puppet leaders for the past 37 years, which has been to make promises that they cannot keep and at the same time forced them to live in a corrupted society they have built for them in the north, with most of the major businesses being run by the Turks from Turkey as well as their goods being embargoed by Turkey. A total classic case of "if you can't fcuk a friend, who can you fcuk". This may all be music to the Fascists NeoPartitionists ears, but the average TCs will want a better future for their children than the one they have been forced to endure for the last 37 years. Lets also not forget Turkey's EU membership factor, which the RoC holds the keys as the last gatekeeper for her to become a EU member. I believe the RoC is prepared to lose the north than lose the whole island to Turkey ba agreeing to something like the 2004 AP. Maybe I'm wrong and that the RoC is prepared to lose the whole island to Turkey, in which case, your wishes will come true. I just wouldn't hold my breath waiting for it if i were you.

[Viewpoint]

Sorry typo 29%, this is what was agreed add to this a voting structure and guaranteed TC and GC % voting and we have a deal.

You think 4 years a long time in "Cypriot" terms you are very very mistaken it takes them years just to get the name plates right at the meetings, the UN will not throw a great deal of hard work down the drain any solution will be a revival of the AP with amendments to make the GCs happy in the hope they will say YES this last time around without losing the TC YES.

[Kikapu]

Sorry typo 29%, this is what was agreed add to this a voting structure and guaranteed TC and GC % voting and we have a deal.

You think 4 years a long time in "Cypriot" terms you are very very mistaken it takes them years just to get the name plates right at the meetings, the UN will not throw a great deal of hard work down the drain any solution will be a revival of the AP with amendments to make the GCs happy in the hope they will say YES this last time around without losing the TC YES.

What, twice in the same post. I don't think so.

Who agreed to 29%.? Surely not the RoC.

They may just label it "Annan Plan" to look like one, just to fool the NeoPartitionist to vote YES again, but in reality, it won't be anything like the AP of 2004. Looks will be deceiving and the joke will be on them.

[Viewpoint]

Sorry typo 29%, this is what was agreed add to this a voting structure and guaranteed TC and GC % voting and we have a deal.

You think 4 years a long time in "Cypriot" terms you are very very mistaken it takes them years just to get the name plates right at the meetings, the UN will not throw a great deal of hard work down the drain any solution will be a revival of the AP with amendments to make the GCs happy in the hope they will say YES this last time around without losing the TC YES.

What, twice in the same post. I don't think so.

Who agreed to 29%.? Surely not the RoC.

They may just label it "Annan Plan" to look like one, just to fool the NeoPartitionist to vote YES again, but in reality, it won't be anything like the AP of 2004. Looks will be deceiving and the joke will be on them.

At what stage will you accept that you are a moron? when the talks cease or when the plan is the regurgitated AP?