Just about everything that they write about Papadopoulos and his past is mud. They didn't prove any of their accusations in the the court did they?
they were not taken to court were they? and especially when it comes to his past i dont think pap would like to play that game in the court.
let me remind you that up to now in court...unfortunately they tend to win. did u ever wonder why?
perhaps the judges are paid by the americans?
as for the analysis. the question i guess is obvious.
why did pap invide the GS to start negotiation?
why did pap accepted to go to referendum when the philosophy of the plan was unacceptable?
why did he authorise the GS to introduce whatever plan he considered appropriate if no agreed solution was reached?
it was sth that pap couldnt even imagine even in the most wildest dreams. the fact that the usually no-sayer denktash went to NY and said for the first time yes, trapped pap like a first year student
somepeople in the south compare pap with denktash. i say denktash was way far more clever. he always took personally on him the responsibility of the failure of the negotiations. while the only time since 1974 the our side was blamed the fault lied on the whole gc community.
so it is clear for the international environment:
all those years the tcs wanted a solution but it was denkatsh to blame.
but the gcs (as you say) dont want a solution.
Would the plan reach this far without the support of the AngloAmericans? I believe the answer is obvious
ofcource they are involved. but dont forget what we also accepted. the plan didnot fall from the sky.
what your analysis also misses is what caused the change in the tc leadership.
However to acheive either of the 2 possible objectives what was needed are people from within Cyprus that would help the Americans create the impression that the Annan plan was indeed a good balanced plan and the ones that rejected it were "hardlines" that didn't want a solution.
For example the Americans would not approach somebody like me to support their aim. But lets say they were aproaching somebody like cypezokyli and told him something in the lines of:
now seriously. do u know how big economically is the USA? if they wanted to pay half of the cypriots to do so they would have (especially if u consider our rousfet attidute i wouldnt say it is difficult) . if they wanted to affect the public opnion they wouldnt just stay on finacing one nwespaper but they would have first of all financed a tv station. and dont tell me they didnt because they were sure that those channels would have said no. for example we all know who owns antenna ( a minister of the coup). if they wanted to play that game they would and they would have done seriously.
second , i am really sorry that up to now the only ones that seem to take it from someone are : matsakis, lilikas and the like.
i am also really sorry that the money from UNOPS didnt go to the traitors (i dont know if u read it but in the opinion leaders there were also editors from philelefteros and simerini whose names were not published at the time. wander why? take a wild guess. )
We are an international organization for peace. This country is ruled by hardliners and they are going to destroy it by missing out the best chance to solve the problem.We know that you are one of the true patriotsthat want to save this place but unfortunately the dictators in here do now allow you to promote your beliefs. Please accept this support from us. Just like you we want the best for Cyprus .. blah blah blah" How many do you think would deny this offer?
hehe i dont tend do define myself as a patriot. pistos' mas tjai me lio nou.
personally i would expect them to be more straighforward. we give you the money and you do the job for us. besides nobody is going to beg to help someone.
if the americans wanted to be really persuasive they could simply say, u either vote yes or we lift the embargo.
What I am saying is that the Americans helped the campaign of many of those that supported the Annan plan and hated Papadopoulos. Of course when you receive money from somebody you are obligated to him. So there is no doubt that some of this people "spiced up" their campaign in a way that they would satisfy even more their sponsors.
nobody hates papadopoulos. its an idea that it is stuck in your head.
why cant u acceot the word disagreement? another opinion?. one day perhaps we will grow up and realise that that also exist as well.
so what u now say is that the money were not given directly for support to AP but the support was from those who were obliged to them.
that is not exactly the same opinion as pap. i mean just read what he said. especially the part with what boutcher said.
what is also amazing is that in this study, is that it is so obvious that channels, pap and christofias lied to the people and nobody cares. nobody wanders: if they lie from where do they take the money? they almost all twisted what boucher said and they translated it into: the americans admitted that the gave money to traitors.
so many years of coercions and the americans would publicly admit that they are bribing. Only the clever cypriots would expect that from the americans. to expect an american official to admit publicly that the US bribed opinion leaders- is i guess cyprus uniqueness. but our clever leaders were saying that!!! in public!!!!and we believe them!!! as our wise tradition would say : etsi kelle...
it is even more amazing that none of all those sure who got the money did not apologise (in cyprus? apologise? i guess i ask for too much)
it is amazing that none doesnt make the simple thought that if the channels with the leadeship can give out to the public so many lies , it is quite propable that they will do it again, or they did it before...but ofcource we are just sure that the ones who disagree took money...
my previous question still stands: could u name one massmedia that supported the AP that you would trust as taking no money from the americans?
