Cyprus-Forum.com

[Pyrpolizer]

I haven't seen that in your reply to BillC, but maybe i am too blind to see it, could you point it out to me?

You have not seen Bills blatant distortion and misrepresentation of fact, as pointed out by me ? How could I make it any clearer ? Bill makes out it is a fact that the case(s) he cites, all prts of them, were ruled by the ECHR as 'no violation' - yet this is clearly and plainly not true. Is that clear enough ?

Erm... I was ALWAYS referring to this line of yours
Your blatant manipulation and distortion of fact is shameless Bill but totally consistent with your history of such individually and communally.
that directly implied that BillC's community (the Kypreoi community i.e), shamelessly and consistently distorts and manipulates history and
facts.
What you said was FULLY in line with the most absurd Turkish and TC leadership propaganda in trying to spread hate among the Kibrisli masses by accusing the Kypreoi community for all their misfortunes.

You later tried to fix things but your original statement in your reply to BillC makes me think your deeper emotions were those expressed first.

[Pyrpolizer]

I am one of those who has no doubts that the RoC law concerning the so called "Guardian of the TC properties" is full of holes to the point that it is actually illegal.
The question is what should the RoC do about this matter given the fact that if she abolishes that law, the Kibrislis will immediately get back all their properties in the free areas while at the same time keep all those so called "exchanged" - better say stolen- Kypreoi properties in the occupied?

Let's face it. The ECHR is only for the rich, it is extremely slow in delivering justice, NO CASE presented on it creates precedence-hence no automatic rulings for other cases etc etc.
How can there ever be justice, if this justice cannot be for all at the same time?

[Maximus]

... and as you disagree, you have to be asked again to tell us which Articles of the Convention, the ECHR found had been violated by CY.

If I was the kind of propaganda BS artist that you are I would post in bold and 150 point text that in all those 1500 odd cases "The ECHR found no violations against Turkey and declared the case Inadmisable (sic)." with the clear BS implication that the ECHR has deemed Turkey not in violation of these people rights.

This is how you redeem yourself, this is what Bill is asking from you.

Post in bold these articles where we can find these ruling and that the ECHR has deemed that Turkey is not in violation of (these) peoples human rights.

[erolz66]

Erm... I was ALWAYS referring to this line of yours
Your blatant manipulation and distortion of fact is shameless Bill but totally consistent with your history of such individually and communally.
that directly implied that BillC's community (the Kypreoi community i.e), shamelessly and consistently distorts and manipulates history and
facts.

It does, as does my community, as I also said ("Communally both sides stick to their propaganda versions of history."). There can be no doubt in any objective persons view that the 'official' version of history of BOTH sides distort and manipulate that history. It is a part of the whole problem. What Bill tries to do here as an individual (present rulings of 'not admissible' as the same as rulings of 'no violation' when they are absolutely different things) is exactly the kind of distortion and manipulation of reality that each sides 'official' version of history are full off.

What you said was FULLY in line with the most absurd Turkish and TC leadership propaganda in trying to spread hate among the Kibrisli masses by accusing the Kypreoi community for all their misfortunes.

You think me saying that BOTH sides 'official' versions of History consistently distort ands manipulate the truth, is fully in line with TC propaganda ? Are you mad ?

[erolz66]

I am one of those who has no doubts that the RoC law concerning the so called "Guardian of the TC properties" is full of holes to the point that it is actually illegal.

You AND the RoC itself that has to admit that the law infringed the rights of TC and pay out over 1/2 million euros in compensation re a SINGLE case.

The question is what should the RoC do about this matter given the fact that if she abolishes that law, the Kibrislis will immediately get back all their properties in the free areas while at the same time keep all those so called "exchanged" - better say stolen- Kypreoi properties in the occupied?

What the RoC could do is amend the law without forcing individuals to go to the ECHR first wait six years and then the day before the ECHR is due to rule, settle the claim and make the smallest possible change to the law and then start the process all over again for those TC who's rights are still being infringed. The law 1991 as amended as a result of the SOFI case infringes the rights of less TC than the original one did but it still infringes the rights of others, including those Bill cites btw. The RoC could pro actively change the law so that it does not infringe these rights of TC, but instead what it will do is wait until a day before they are due to be ruled on by the ECHR and then again make a minimal change and settle that case and start the process all over again for those who rights are still being infringed.

The idea that the RoC can not settle any TC claims now because there is no way to ensure that TC have not 'double dipped' is just nonsense. Nonsense that the RoC know would not stand up to a ruling by the ECHR, which is why it did not present that as a defence in the SOFI case but instead settled this case, admitting having been violating her rights. That is WHY they settled because if they did not then the ECHR would drive what changes they need to make to law 1991 thus depriving them of the ability to play this 'gaming' of constant small and minimal changes. There are any number of ways that the law could be amended so that it both did not infringe the rights of TC and prevented double dipping. The idea that there is no way possible of preventing double dipping without infringing the rights of TC and thus that excuses the infringing of TC rights re property ion the South on the basis of 'what else can they do', is I am afraid a classic example of the BS manipulation of truth in the 'official version' of history.

Let's face it. The ECHR is only for the rich, it is extremely slow in delivering justice, NO CASE presented on it creates precedence-hence no automatic rulings for other cases etc etc.
How can there ever be justice, if this justice cannot be for all at the same time?

The ECHR is flawed in many respects and time to judgment is certainly its single biggest weakness but it still represents a unique forum for international justice. I would rather live in a world with the ECHR as flawed as it is than without it.

[Pyrpolizer]

Erm... I was ALWAYS referring to this line of yours
Your blatant manipulation and distortion of fact is shameless Bill but totally consistent with your history of such individually and communally.
that directly implied that BillC's community (the Kypreoi community i.e), shamelessly and consistently distorts and manipulates history and
facts.

It does, as does my community, as I also said ("Communally both sides stick to their propaganda versions of history."). There can be no doubt in any objective persons view that the 'official' version of history of BOTH sides distort and manipulate that history. It is a part of the whole problem. What Bill tries to do here as an individual (present rulings of 'not admissible' as the same as rulings of 'no violation' when they are absolutely different things) is exactly the kind of distortion and manipulation of reality that each sides 'official' version of history are full off.

What you said was FULLY in line with the most absurd Turkish and TC leadership propaganda in trying to spread hate among the Kibrisli masses by accusing the Kypreoi community for all their misfortunes.

You think me saying that BOTH sides 'official' versions of History consistently distort ands manipulate the truth, is fully in line with TC propaganda ? Are you mad ?

No what you said INITIALLY was fully in line with Turkish and Turkish Cypriot propaganda.

You do comment on everyone's posts line by line why do you leave the most important lines out?
you left this out from my post that explained my point very clearly.
You later tried to fix things but your original statement in your reply to BillC makes me think your deeper emotions were those expressed first.

And why are you calling people names? I never called you any names...

[Pyrpolizer]

The idea that the RoC can not settle any TC claims now because there is no way to ensure that TC have not 'double dipped' is just nonsense. Nonsense that the RoC know would not stand up to a ruling by the ECHR, which is why it did not present that as a defence in the SOFI case but instead settled this case, admitting having been violating her rights. That is WHY they settled because if they did not then the ECHR would drive what changes they need to make to law 1991 thus depriving them of the ability to play this 'gaming' of constant small and minimal changes. There are any number of ways that the law could be amended so that it both did not infringe the rights of TC and prevented double dipping. The idea that there is no way possible of preventing double dipping without infringing the rights of TC and thus that excuses the infringing of TC rights re property ion the South on the basis of 'what else can they do', is I am afraid a classic example of the BS manipulation of truth in the 'official version' of history.

I am interested to learn about those number of ways in detail please.

[erolz66]

This is how you redeem yourself, this is what Bill is asking from you.

Post in bold these articles where we can find these ruling and that the ECHR has deemed that Turkey is not in violation of (these) peoples human rights.

Are you so stupid or so blinded by partisan ship that you can not see or admit Bills manipulation here ?

You post, in any font strength you like, where the ECHR has ruled no violation against the RoC in the cases cited by Bill in regards to their claim over property in the South. The fact is you can not because as far as their claim re property goes the ruling is 'not admissible'. That Bill then seeks to present this as being a ruling of 'no violation' is the most blatant and shameless manipulation of the facts that you are now complicit it.

I will try and make it as simple for you as possible.

A ruling of 'no violation' means the court has considered the merits of the case and judged that the defending party did not violate the rights of the complaining party.

A ruling of 'not admissible' means the court has made no judgment as to if the defending party has violated the rights of the complaining party.

In the case Bill sites - you can see it for yourself here - http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pag ... 001-109812

the ruling was

For these reasons, the Court unanimously Decides to join the applications; Declares the applications inadmissible.

Bill then portrays this , in 150 point type and bold as "The ECHR found No Violations against CY and declared the case Inadmisable."

He actively and with intent tries to make out that the actual ruling 'declared the case Inadmisable' is the same as a ruling of 'no violation'. He tries to do first because in the conclusions to the ruling in regard to other violations the claimants made additional claims (against the UK and the Greece - NOT the RoC) and in regard to these and ONLY these 'additional claims' the court noted "In the light of all the material in its possession, and in so far as the matters complained of are within its competence, the Court finds no appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms set out in the Convention or its Protocols arising from these complaints. (the additional ones against the UK and Greece)". He then further tries to justify his shameless and blatant manipulation of the facts with the 'defence' of - show me where the ECHR says the RoC committed a violation and if you can not then it proves that they made a ruling of 'no violation' - which is just plain false logic, again cynically used to try and distort and mislead. Even a seven year old could understand that a finding of 'no violation' is not the same as the court has made no judgment yet.

This is so simple, so clear and so black and white. Please do continue to try and defend such shameless and blatant manipulations and distortions because by doing so you just show the extent to which you will manipulate the truth for your own propaganda purposes or defend such manipulation.

[erolz66]

No what you said INITIALLY was fully in line with Turkish and Turkish Cypriot propaganda.

You do comment on everyone's posts line by line why do you leave the most important lines out?
you left this out from my post that explained my point very clearly.
You later tried to fix things but your original statement in your reply to BillC makes me think your deeper emotions were those expressed first.

Look in the first post mentioning 'communal' manipulation I did not mention my side doing so as well as yours because I mistakenly thought it literally goes without saying that both do. As soon as you 'question' my not explicitly stating my side also does this, I immediately and unequivocally stated that both do. What is more my historic consistency on this point, that both sides official versions of the Cyprob are 'propaganda' versions and that is a large part of the Cyprob, is legion. I could show you countless times where I have stated this explicitly in public over the last 10 years here and elsewhere.

That you see my making my view explicitly clear in response to your post as 'fixing things' and that I did not do so in my original post as indication of some 'deeper emotion', despite my 10 year history of repeatedly saying both sides official version of history are propaganda BS, is your issue not mine.

That you seem so intent on this point, but seemingly have no comment or view on if presenting a ruling of 'not admissable' as the same as one of 'no violations' is or is not a blatant and shameless distortion of fact is I think quite telling.

And why are you calling people names? I never called you any names...

?

[erolz66]

The idea that the RoC can not settle any TC claims now because there is no way to ensure that TC have not 'double dipped' is just nonsense. Nonsense that the RoC know would not stand up to a ruling by the ECHR, which is why it did not present that as a defence in the SOFI case but instead settled this case, admitting having been violating her rights. That is WHY they settled because if they did not then the ECHR would drive what changes they need to make to law 1991 thus depriving them of the ability to play this 'gaming' of constant small and minimal changes. There are any number of ways that the law could be amended so that it both did not infringe the rights of TC and prevented double dipping. The idea that there is no way possible of preventing double dipping without infringing the rights of TC and thus that excuses the infringing of TC rights re property ion the South on the basis of 'what else can they do', is I am afraid a classic example of the BS manipulation of truth in the 'official version' of history.

I am interested to learn about those number of ways in detail please.

As I am interested in your view re if presenting a ruling of 'not admissible' by the ECHR is the same as it ruling 'no violation' is a blatant and shameless distortion of fact ? Anyway

Can you accept that the amendment of law 1991 as a result of the Sofi case removes the violations by the RoC of some TC rights to property vs the original version of this law ? Can you further accept that as a result of this amendment there has not been a flood of cases of double dipping ? So that clearly the law can be amended to not infring TC property rights as much and still avoid double dipping ? If you can accept these things then that is a start.

Over all I think that the argument that the RoC violating the rights of TC over their property in the south is necessary to prevent double dipping deeply spurious. The first and foremost mechanism for preventing double dipping is that to do so would involve a criminal act of fraud. The simplest way of the RoC preventing such frauds would be co operation with the TRNC over this issue as they have every incentive to not allow individuals to get away with double dipping. However lets accept that this is something the RoC can not countenance. The next means, as with any potential fraud, would be investigation. The land registry records in the North are public domain information and easily available to RoC investigators. Further Cyprus is a small place where everyone knows everyone else's business. Finally there is the 'setting an example' of those who may try and commit such a fraud and who get caught, with maximum punishment under the law and the widest possible media coverage of such examples. At the end of the day I am not an expert in fraud investigation but as I say I find this whole argument that it is necessary to violate the rights of TC over property to avoid double dipping highly spurious.