Cyprus-Forum.com

[claret21]

The Zurich agreements gave the T/Cs a 30% share in government.
From the beginning it was doomed to fail, since also giving the minority a veto meant that no section could govern, on one hand the majority could not pass any laws without the consent of the minority and of course neither could the minority do so. Unworkable from the start.
Lets just see whether any other nation on earth has ever had such a constitution, to the best of my knowledge none ever did.

[Viewpoint]

...indeed, you are Persons, and in Cyprus as Persons you seek the recognition as an equal; this is possible, but it is not what you ask, vp.

as Individuals we are equals, and that is True for everyone.

...why not open yourselves to the other Constituencies as a Constituency, big and small, it would not be hard to settle Territorial Jurisdictions if the question of Sovereignty was not involved. invite the Constituencies to this table, not the Republic, such a unanimous appeal to the State could be possible, as Peoples it would have credibility worthy, as a Republic to consider, and as a result the Republic itself will reform, because the people have representation as Persons, to represent its Citizens as Individuals, better. worthy too to Turkey, if the Republic was free of any discrimination or distinction as a Government recognised, not easily corrupted as a force for any particular Person because they are an overwhelming majority.

Rights vp, you have Rights, what you are asking for is to define your Liberty, in terms of Freedom you cannot ask for any special recognition. you must recognise the value of a Republic as a Turkish Constituency, you must demand that a Greek Constituency must in effect exist, to recognise as equals the same Principals. you, or "you", need the recognition of Greek Cypriots as a Constituency, not the Republic, no one else matters, demand it and it will make clear that a State, an equal to Turkey (or Greece, etc.) for Cypriots as Cypriots, is important to you/"you", it is possible as an aim, too.

...split the baby in half you say; this is no divorce, Cyprus is not property to be divided. my point is that there is an alternative, and we are lucky, with the Modern Age to be Free, rather than the chattel of an ongoing History of subjugation and/or plunder. something we can demonstrate, every one of us, as Men, we are Grateful for with an island that is without borders, as Cypriots Sovereign, and as Persons in harmony. it is not hard to choose, and it is natural, from the Unitary State a Greek State, to a Cypriot State, Bicommunal Bizonal, and a Federation, here is the Honourable compromise.

if you are a "Turk" you speak for your few as though they are the many, no different to any elite, "Greek", or otherwise; but we are talking something bigger, as Cypriots.

You are one confused individual, for the umpteeth time its the GCs who reject your ideology not the TCs...why do you keep peddling your solution to me...I would support BBF with political equality of th 2 states. As for the baby being split, that happened in 1974, if no one has told you we are physically divided today north and south...been 40 years repulse please try and keep up.

[Viewpoint]

The Zurich agreements gave the T/Cs a 30% share in government.
From the beginning it was doomed to fail, since also giving the minority a veto meant that no section could govern, on one hand the majority could not pass any laws without the consent of the minority and of course neither could the minority do so. Unworkable from the start.
Lets just see whether any other nation on earth has ever had such a constitution, to the best of my knowledge none ever did.

Did your research tell you why the veto was given? whether you agree with it or not is part a of a binding agreement between the 2 partners. This does nto mean it cannot be changed but it has to exchanged for something which will make the TCs want to give it up, to date the Gcs have offered nothing in comparision or close...the last attempt was the AP and we all know what happened there. the GCs want this veto removed so they can have free range to rule the whole of Cyprus using the "numerical" advantage without Tcs effectively having say in their own country, forcing a once owner of the whole island into minority status in their homeland which is what you also support. You really need to also look at it from our perspective, the TCs never say they will not compromise and BBF is a comprmise from taksim which remember we have physically achieved and could continue for a long time to come.

[claret21]

The Zurich agreements gave the T/Cs a 30% share in government.
From the beginning it was doomed to fail, since also giving the minority a veto meant that no section could govern, on one hand the majority could not pass any laws without the consent of the minority and of course neither could the minority do so. Unworkable from the start.
Lets just see whether any other nation on earth has ever had such a constitution, to the best of my knowledge none ever did.

Did your research tell you why the veto was given? whether you agree with it or not is part a of a binding agreement between the 2 partners. This does nto mean it cannot be changed but it has to exchanged for something which will make the TCs want to give it up, to date the Gcs have offered nothing in comparision or close...the last attempt was the AP and we all know what happened there. the GCs want this veto removed so they can have free range to rule the whole of Cyprus using the "numerical" advantage without Tcs effectively having say in their own country, forcing a once owner of the whole island into minority status in their homeland which is what you also support. You really need to also look at it from our perspective, the TCs never say they will not compromise and BBF is a comprmise from taksim which remember we have physically achieved and could continue for a long time to come.

I like this VP. " a once owner of the whole island into minority status in their homeland which is what you also support. "
The Ottoman empire conquered Cyprus by invading the island and defeating the then rulers, the Venetians. The British too ruled the island but I can not possibly imagine any Brit making the same comments you have just made. The island has been conquered by many invaders, the island still belongs to the Cypriots.

[boomerang]

VP always talks numerical advantage but he does not realise by saying this he admits to being a minority...

even ahmet the david bitchslapped the tcs...he admitted in his book even if there was a any turks in cyprus turkey would have invaded anyway...so the reasoning came to tc aid is kinda a nin starter...

simply put, the turks give as much shit about cyprus as the greeks do...

the reason taksim has not happened is because turkey can't abnd not because the the tcs want it...even though they are outnumbered in the kfc farm by settlers and could pass easily it has not and will not happen...
1...UN will not allow it
2...if the 1960 agreement is torn, the british will have to renegotiate their bases, it will cost money and that's if they strike a deal
3...turkey wouldn't want another country, greece, russia, us, france, israel having bases under her nose
4...the list goes on

what turkey wants is control of the whole island, but she is late, the island is under EU control and this is eating the turks from the inside out...especially the EU claimed the whole of the island...what this means is that 3 possibly all 5 of them will not agree to a split...especially france and the UK...they already signatories to the borders of EU as they are members that signed on the EU dotted line...

so as everyone can see little the turks can do...

in my honest opinion the turks should have extended indefinetely their eu vocation that started when the roc took the presidency... ...not that that they got or getting anywhere, but could save us the daily bullshit...

[Maximus]

Oh LORD,

Can you imagine giving these illegitimates a veto in running the country, look what happened last time. They would veto everything until they get their own way. They will do this either out of spite or to extort benefits from the majority for the absolute minority. Dont forget Turkey forever pulling the strings and meddling in Cyprus internal affairs, looking for the next excuse to ' legally intervene' and commit more atrocities.

Your delusional VP if you think the RoC is going to go backwards towards Turkish persecution to suit a rabid birdbrained ideology such as yours.

You must be a Turkish Sociopath, there are hardly any Turkish Cypriots left in the north.

Your first sentence sir is extremely hostile,you are I hope addressing the two protagonists on this forum and not the entire T/C community.

Lets not trip up over ourselves, there are some TC's who do not follow the official doctrine they inherited in the 60's, also there are about 3000 legitimate TC's living in the RoC today.

If/when you can demonstrate to me that the official line of the TC community (as a majority) is equality and democracy and not veto rights against the majority of Cypriots, then I will retract my comment to not mean them (in the majority of the sense).

I find hostility and malicious intent in a minority pushing for and demanding veto rights against a majority ( GC's). This is a form of apartheid.

[Viewpoint]

The Zurich agreements gave the T/Cs a 30% share in government.
From the beginning it was doomed to fail, since also giving the minority a veto meant that no section could govern, on one hand the majority could not pass any laws without the consent of the minority and of course neither could the minority do so. Unworkable from the start.
Lets just see whether any other nation on earth has ever had such a constitution, to the best of my knowledge none ever did.

Did your research tell you why the veto was given? whether you agree with it or not is part a of a binding agreement between the 2 partners. This does nto mean it cannot be changed but it has to exchanged for something which will make the TCs want to give it up, to date the Gcs have offered nothing in comparision or close...the last attempt was the AP and we all know what happened there. the GCs want this veto removed so they can have free range to rule the whole of Cyprus using the "numerical" advantage without Tcs effectively having say in their own country, forcing a once owner of the whole island into minority status in their homeland which is what you also support. You really need to also look at it from our perspective, the TCs never say they will not compromise and BBF is a comprmise from taksim which remember we have physically achieved and could continue for a long time to come.

I like this VP. " a once owner of the whole island into minority status in their homeland which is what you also support. "
The Ottoman empire conquered Cyprus by invading the island and defeating the then rulers, the Venetians. The British too ruled the island but I can not possibly imagine any Brit making the same comments you have just made. The island has been conquered by many invaders, the island still belongs to the Cypriots.

The Brits have their part of the island so lets not go there the bottom line is what ever the string of events leading to the end result we have an internationally recognized agreement which with the right to veto give us equal a partnership status, your research is null and void if you havent understood this very basic principle. Why do you think the UN treats our weight as 50% in finding a solution, without it there is no solution no agreement just more of the same, division.

Now try to focus on the position and importance of both partners not just the GCs who of course do not want an equal partner they want to force us to giveour rights and become just another minority like the Pakistanis in the in their state, this we will never accept and fight to the end to stop.....now do you understand how this is a red line for us that we will never cross unless we are given a better deal.

[Maximus]

.now do you understand how this is a red line for us that we will never cross unless we are given a better deal.

You are referring to veto rights against the vast majority.

Just to clarify, are you speaking on behalf of the majority of TC's, the settlers or both?

[boomerang]

50% huh?...how come you got 100% of the punishment then?..and your explanation for this is?...

[Viewpoint]

.now do you understand how this is a red line for us that we will never cross unless we are given a better deal.

You are referring to veto rights against the vast majority.

Just to clarify, are you speaking on behalf of the majority of TC's, the settlers or both?

take it how you like you always do anyway.