My apologies for taking so long to respond to your post. Time is somewhat limited when wanting to respond fully to your post.
Viewpoint wrote:Kikapu lets dissect your post and give you answers which you will no doubt have problems understand as they do not conform to your biased one sided views;
We are not talking about tourists who are EU member states citizens. If the EU is going to control these ports, then they will need to handle these ports as any other EU ports, which means those who do not need visas can come as tourist with no problem, but those coming from Turkey cannot enter any EU countries without first getting visas, so all the Turks coming from Turkey with Turkish passport will need to get visas before arriving, even as tourists.. All those Turks living in the north today are mainly Illegal Aliens, so once they leave, they cannot return without visas, and if they want to apply for work permits or residence permits, they will need to have a long wait. So basically, all those Illegal Aliens in the north now, once they leave the north, coming back will be based on any other EU country's rules. If this is not done, what will be the purpose of the EU controlling these ports, so please answer that question.
This is in part is acceptable but if such rules are to be applied then there must be equality between the south and north, all those who settled and were granted citizenship after 1974 have to be treated the same be they Turk Greek Indian Pakistani Filipino English etc etc, otherwise discrimination will not be acceptable.
So basically what you are saying is, start fresh from here on and ignore all the Illegal Aliens in the north just because they were given citizenship to the "trnc", an illegal entity, who mainly are living in stolen GC land and properties, which then it must also mean that the GC refugees should forget about ever getting back their properties, because if all the Illegal Aliens in the north are then allowed to remain in the north legally by the EU, then they must also mean they will automatically become EU citizens as well as become legal owners of all the stolen GCs properties, otherwise according to you, "discrimination" will not be accepted. Really? In any case, this is one more confirmation that your real interests lies with the Illegal Aliens than TCs themselves.
First of all, discrimination does not come into play at all here. We are talking about legal part of Cyprus allowing non-EU citizens to live in the south, whether as citizens of Cyprus or as permanent residents. EU citizens are naturally allowed to live automatically. You cannot say that the north should be treated the same in allowing all those who were granted "trnc" citizenship by an illegal entity, for them now to be seen as legal citizens of Cyprus, an EU territory, and for the EU to allow these people to come and go as citizens of Cyprus and as citizens of the EU, because that will be the only way for the EU controlling the ports in the north to not to ask for visas from all the Illegal Aliens in the north and for them instead to be treated as citizens of the EU.
If this were to be allowed by the EU, then surely for ALL the other Illegal Aliens in the other 28 EU member states should be given the same treatment, for them to come and go freely as if they were now EU citizens. If not, than that would be discriminatory towards all the other Illegal Aliens living in other EU member states. Naturally that will not be the case in the EU, and neither will be the case in the north under EU controlled ports, otherwise what would be the purpose of having the EU control these ports, because the "trnc" will just continue issuing more "citizenships" to the Turks to come legally to Cyprus just so not to be seen as being "discriminatory" towards all the other Turks or any others who want to come to the north as Illegal Aliens?
Lets stay with the present and not drift to the past, since it is today we are interested in a settlement. In any case, since you have brought up the claim that the GCs wanting to give Cyprus to Greece, then why didn't they do that since 1963 when there hasn't been any TCs in the RoC government to veto such an act, just as they did by giving Cyprus to the EU? Any ideas? The 1960's constitution was designed for Cyprus to be partitioned between Greece, Turkey and Britain, so no one has clean hands when it comes to those days. Since there is no such a move to give Cyprus to Greece, then there cannot be a fight by the TCs to prevent such a thing, so what is it you want me to support in what the TCs are trying to do?
Hello the whole idea was to give Cyprus to Greece after 1963 do recall the coup? but you also conveniently forget the systematic process of squeezing the TC out by restricting their economy and encouraging them to leave by find them jobs in the UK Canada and Australia.
You also want to forget the past so as not to highlight that the plight of the minority being the TCs against the GCs was right just as the case is in Turkey and Egypt, do you support their fight against giving Cyprus to Greece?
The discussion is about what should happen today to the ports in the north under the EU control, therefore this topic is about the present and not the past, so there's no point talking about the past for this purpose, even though your question has already been answered by others regarding the so called "giving Cyprus to Greece" in the 74 coup. But as long as you bring it up, you need to answer my question as to why Cyprus did not give Cyprus to Greece after 63 when there were no TCs in the RoC's government to veto such a move. If you insist on talking about the past, then answer this very simple question, otherwise just move to the present.
You must have gotten me mixed up with Erdogan and Morsi who believe, that just because the majority is elected to power, they can do as they wish. That has been always your claim by scaremongering. Have you once said anything against Erdogan's fascistic rule or have you at all supported the protesters in Turkey and now in Egypt? I don't believe you have not in either case, so does that mean you support the majority to as they wish. You seem to do just that in Erdogan's and Morsi's case, are you not?
Exactly you are no different from Erdoğan as you support that majority rule which even gives them every right to gift a county to another without taking into account what a considerable part of the population want....you are no different in fact you are worse as you try to camouflage your real intentions under the label of "true democracy and human rights",I revealed this in the sell out plan you put forward.
For the record I have said many times that I support the Kurds being given their own country just like the TCs but of course you only take in what you want.
Of course I support majority rule, but this does not mean the majority can take away the rights of the minority just as your friend Erdogan and Morsi are/were doing, which you supported these actors without not once criticising Erdogan during the Gezi movement. We are not talking about the Kurds issue, which is a separate issue altogether, and yes, they should have their own state because the land they are on is their own land way before there was ever a modern Turkey. TCs on the other hand, do not have their own separate land in Cyprus to make it their own country just as the Kurds want and will get eventually. There's a huge difference between the two don't you think?
One being elected in a Democratic country does not make that leader a King to rule by decree. Erdogan and Morsi are just an another dictators camouflaged by wearing suits as democrats and talking about democracy as if they believed in it, other than getting elected by it, but then throw it in the bin afterwards. In this respect, Erdogan and Morsi are no different than what Hitler did. It's funny how Erdogan says "should we do away with the Democratic progress just because it might produce another Hitler" talking about himself and Morsi, no doubt. The answer is a "NO", of course. The question he should have been asking is "should a leader like Hitler ONLY to be removed by democratic progress" and the answer to that question is also a "NO".
Such leaders should be removed in any way possible, by a revolution, assassination, Military take over to start fresh with True Democracy and so on, because a leader like Hitler could not be removed democratically, since he controlled the whole country and any so called "democratic progress" in removing him. No different with Erdogan and Morsi really, as they are/were little by little controlling any "democratic progress" that would be needed to remove them. As these institutions come under the control of a dictatorial leader, then options in removing such tyrants are no longer through democratic means, but any other which way possible and good riddance to bad rubbish.
As for my democratic plan for Cyprus under
"Kikapu's "BBF" Power Sharing Plan" cyprus21685.html , it was all explained in the first post, so don't keep harping on that you have discovered anything hidden in that plan that would be detrimental to the TCs. But if you insist on doing that, then don't blame me for making you look stupid, agreed?
I support no such position where the majority can do as they wish, and if you think I do, then you must produce documents backing your claims, otherwise you will look like a liar, specially if you need to have an honest discussion. I support majority rule in a Democratic way with everyone’s democratic and Human Rights protected as per the constitution and the Rule of Law. In any case, majority rule to me is a political distinction and not an ethnic one. Cyprus will have many political parties and each party will have mixed ethnicities, and yes, the majority political party will rule, but not like Erdogan or Morsi who will want to rule by decree rather than democratically involving all the citizens and not just cater for those who had voted for them, or else, peoples "Checks & Balances" will be applied as Morsi found out and so will Erdogan if he doesn't change course very quickly.
You are the liar and your biased sell out mindset is proof enough for everyone to see and recognize this fact. What you support may work in the right hands but believe me the GCs being the majority is not the right hands and would place us in great danger.
If what you say will be true in a Democratic Cyprus as an EU member state that the majority (GCs) will take away the rights of the minority, then the minority (TCs) can use the ultimate weapon of
"Checks & Balances" if all the other projections afforded to ALL citizens should fail, just the case was in Egypt and Turkey and take to the street and win. You see, it has been proven that even against Tyrants such as Erdogan and Morsi, even the minorities can win through demonstrations and overthrow of Tyrants. You really do not have any arguments left regarding protection of the TCs, have you? You just don’t want to live with the GCs in Cyprus under one nation and citizenship. That’s your own prejudice and racism and has nothing to do with the GCs. One thing for sure, you have ZERO right to hold onto the northern part of Cyprus exclusively as if it has always belonged to the TCs. It did not and it never will. It’s time to agree on True Federation, True Democracy, Human Rights, International Laws and the EU Principles for ALL Cypriots in Cyprus. Anything less will end up as it did in the 60’s and 70’s and more recently as it has been the case in Egypt and yet worse to come to Turkey.
