zan wrote:Kikapu wrote:zan wrote:No one is "making up" because no one broke up. We were having an internal discussion in which you have no place. Simplesjust because two people of the TRNC have differing views and discuss something, that does not make for a breakup. I think it would fit into your model of " democracy" no?
As I have said to you before, what have you done with your plan? Has it made its way to the discussion table? I am sure the two teams would welcome ityou have gone way beyond your remit on this forum. Try discussing something real instead of trying to score points
Believe it or not, Zan, my plan was to mostly benefit the TCs, unless one is a neopartitionist of course, in which case there is no pleasing them (VP, et al), except partition. The TCs did not take advantage of it which the GCs were offering Rotating Presidency at the time where I was able to use that to be able to build a veto power into the system that would be democratic. A veto power that the TCs were/are after in an undemocratic way. The fact that only our good friend DT was the only GC who supported my plan, goes to show it was not for those GCs who want only a unitary state, but since BBF is the only proposal on the table, the TCs could have benefitted greatly and still be a democratic system. But you can kiss off that "veto power" now that was in my system and you can also kiss off the "Rotating Presidency". So forget about my BBF Plan, because it's time has come and gone regarding the veto power and the rotating presidency. Now you can only use it for a settlement based on EU Principles.
As I said before and again………Put it to the "RoC" and see what happens…..DT has great clout and could have done it for you…..If it was that great then they could have put it to the TCs and we could not have possibly refused. Why waste it on a forum that has limited readers? Ill tell you why…..Because you would have been laughed out of the "RoC". This Forum and its subscribers gave you at least a little bit of credibility and you have gone no further. now you tell me we missed out
A man walks into a shop to buy a new suit. He likes it but doesn't want to pay full price so he tries to barter with the shop keeper. "I want this suit he says but the shop down town has it for 25% less". "So go buy it there" says the shop keeper. "I can't" says the man, "They haven't got any left". "So come back when I haven't got any left and I'll offer it to you for 25% less" says the shop keeper.
Zan, with all due respect, you should give up your day job and take up stand up comic, or a sit down comic vertiliquest VP as a dummy sitting on your lap.
Listen, VP claims to represent the majority of the TCs in the north, so he had his chance to tell everyone about me, a brilliant TC's BBF plan with "Veto Power & Rotating Presidency", and now VP is upset about the roatating Presidency being taken away, as well as the "Veto Power" by default, because he had not acted on it. That's because he is ONLY interested in a complete Partition, just so that his kids doesn't have to hear Greek spoken around them. So blame VP for not getting the word to Eroglu, the other NeoPartitionist of my great BBF plan.
Listen to how upset Mr Bloody (Kanli) is about the "Rotating Presidency".
YUSUF KANLI:
The left spectrum has started claiming Greek Cypriots stepped back from the “rotation of presidency” convergence of the Mehmet Ali Talat-Demetris Christofias period because incumbent President Derviş Eroğlu retracted from the “cross voting” that was also agreed upon. Of course, cross voting – under which Turkish Cypriots would have a 20 percent bearing effect on the Greek presidential vote and vice versa – was an issue in 2010, but it was a part of a package rejected by Greek Cypriots and thus went down the drain. While rotation of presidency was a principle agreed on in exchange for Talat agreeing to Christofias’ demand of “one state, one nationality and one sovereign.” Yet, it was because of the strong allergy of the Turkish Cypriot people to cross voting that Talat lost the presidential vote to Eroğlu.
Now, rehashing those old discussions with a claim that Anastasiades gave up rotation of presidency because Eroğlu rejected cross voting, sorry to say, is a big lie that cannot help any presidential ambition.
http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/if-it- ... sCatID=425
There’s no comparison between the states he’s lived in and what was being proposed for Cyprus.
