Cyprus-Forum.com

[Kikapu]

Democracy as in where all citizens are treated equally, which is the catalyst that binds individuals to make the "people" of any country, Erolz. Cyprus as a whole never had True Democracy in it's history, is the reason why the people did not bind together. Without True Democracy for Cyprus, people of Cyprus will never bind to become "one people", and there are those who are doing everything to deny for Cyprus to have "one people" by not wanting True Democracy for Cyprus.

You really think if enosis had been achieved in 1960, that TC would have been treated equally to GC in Cyprus ? That TC would have become part of 'one people' - the Greek people ?

We don't know for anything for certainty, Erolz, because we never had a True Democracy, or even just Democracy in Cyprus in 1960. Had we had True Democracy in 1960, who is to say Enosis would have been sought by the GCs, so your argument has no merits really.

The "Democratic EU" is a club and not an individual country, therefore club rules do apply, which are no different than your local Golf Country Club or a Pub landlord or restaurant owner who can refuse to let you become a club member or serve you if he doesn't want to for what ever reason. Don't mix your oranges and lemons, Erolz. That is their Democratic rights to do so if they wish to, and some do.

I love this idea that the principals of democracy are somehow different within a country than with unions of countries. It is an argument that has no logical foundation to it. Within countries there are countless examples where democracy requires equal representation of groups regardless of numbers just as there are countless examples in unions between countries. The reason why democracy requires such disproportionate representation is obvious, unless you have a political agenda to ignore it. To say that democracy works one way for oranges and another way for lemons is your madness not mine.

Just because members of the club have agreed amongst themselves initially that any member can have a veto rights on certain times, it does not mean Democracy does not exists in those member states or the club itself. Doesn't NATO members have a veto power over new members being allowed to the NATO club? I don't know what your argument is really. If you are upset about EU member clubs having a veto power on new members wanting to join the EU club because it effects Turkey, then why didn't you object to the Annan Plan that was giving veto power to the TCs and the GCs as a community for the New United Cyprus as a country? Even worse, the TC community is going to be much smaller than the GC community, so why didn't you object to a numerical minority having veto power over the numerical majority? I'm sorry Erolz, but you are trying to make Orange juice from a lemon and lemonade from an Orange. Once again, your argument has no merits at all.

[Kikapu]

http://www.cumhuriyet.com.tr/Archive/2014/2/6/38313_resource/fular.jpg

I am happy to report an error in the above post. It seems that on 6 February, Ayşe Deniz Karacagil (pictured above, centre), indicted, inter alia, on the charge of “wearing a red neckerchief which symbolises socialism,” along with four other people arrested in the course of the Gezi protests and indicted on similarly ludicrous and unfounded charges, was acquitted by Antalya Serious Crime Court on 6 February after spending four months and four days in remand - surely a punishment of a kind.

I see this as being a victory for the Turkish judicial system which has not yet been fully brought under the political control of the autocratic AKP regime - but you can be sure they are working on it and one day the outrageous offence - in the eyes of Islamofascists - of a woman wearing a red neckerchief (or even being alleged to have done so) will not go unpunished - unless Erdoğan is kicked out in the coming presidential elections.

http://www.cumhuriyet.com.tr/haber/turk ... ozgur.html

Funny thing is, Tim, that the Turkish flag is 90% red and people wear it and carry it all the time when they come to support Dictator Erdogan at rallies, but no one calls them socialist.

[Tim Drayton]

http://www.cumhuriyet.com.tr/Archive/2014/2/6/38313_resource/fular.jpg

I am happy to report an error in the above post. It seems that on 6 February, Ayşe Deniz Karacagil (pictured above, centre), indicted, inter alia, on the charge of “wearing a red neckerchief which symbolises socialism,” along with four other people arrested in the course of the Gezi protests and indicted on similarly ludicrous and unfounded charges, was acquitted by Antalya Serious Crime Court on 6 February after spending four months and four days in remand - surely a punishment of a kind.

I see this as being a victory for the Turkish judicial system which has not yet been fully brought under the political control of the autocratic AKP regime - but you can be sure they are working on it and one day the outrageous offence - in the eyes of Islamofascists - of a woman wearing a red neckerchief (or even being alleged to have done so) will not go unpunished - unless Erdoğan is kicked out in the coming presidential elections.

http://www.cumhuriyet.com.tr/haber/turk ... ozgur.html

Funny thing is, Tim, that the Turkish flag is 90% red and people wear it and carry it all the time when they come to support Dictator Erdogan at rallies, but no one calls them socialist.

Black seems to be colour preferred by ISIS.

[erolz66]

We don't know for anything for certainty, Erolz, because we never had a True Democracy, or even just Democracy in Cyprus in 1960. Had we had True Democracy in 1960, who is to say Enosis would have been sought by the GCs, so your argument has no merits really.

lol

Just because members of the club have agreed amongst themselves initially that any member can have a veto rights on certain times, it does not mean Democracy does not exists in those member states or the club itself. Doesn't NATO members have a veto power over new members being allowed to the NATO club? I don't know what your argument is really. If you are upset about EU member clubs having a veto power on new members wanting to join the EU club because it effects Turkey, then why didn't you object to the Annan Plan that was giving veto power to the TCs and the GCs as a community for the New United Cyprus as a country? Even worse, the TC community is going to be much smaller than the GC community, so why didn't you object to a numerical minority having veto power over the numerical majority? I'm sorry Erolz, but you are trying to make Orange juice from a lemon and lemonade from an Orange. Once again, your argument has no merits at all.

My 'thesis' is totally consistent, that representation separate to sheer numerical numbers is not only compatible with democracy but is required by it in certain cases. This is true within a state and within union of states. Its true of the EU and UN, its true in individual states where equal representation regardless of numerical size exists all through government, national and local. It is universally true. Those who have a consistency problem are those who try to argue its true for oranges and not for lemons - or to be more explicit those that argue any system in Cyprus that grants TC as a community representation disproportionate to their numerical numbers is not 'true democracy', whilst not arguing for the same principal anywhere else. Those are the ones with a consistency deficit and it seems to me that you are one of that number ?

[zan]

Kiks doesn't even understand what he himself writes, never mind what is said to him


Full of contradictions again and again. The EU is a club that decided for itself but we must have it forced on us. What happened to democratic choice?

Oranges and lemons
Says a head full of melons

I really am thick
Says the man from Zürıch

When will he learn
Says the bells of Lucerne

I don't think he will
Says the bells of Giswil

What a poor lad
Says the bells of Stansstad

Then let's make him well
Says the bells of Gimel

Here comes a candle to light you to bed
And here comes a doctor to sort out your head


Sorry Kiks. Couldn't resist.

[Kikapu]

Kiks doesn't even understand what he himself writes, never mind what is said to him


Full of contradictions again and again. The EU is a club that decided for itself but we must have it forced on us. What happened to democratic choice?

Oranges and lemons
Says a head full of melons

I really am thick
Says the man from Zürıch

When will he learn
Says the bells of Lucerne

I don't think he will
Says the bells of Giswil

What a poor lad
Says the bells of Stansstad

Then let's make him well
Says the bells of Gimel

Here comes a candle to light you to bed
And here comes a doctor to sort out your head


Sorry Kiks. Couldn't resist.

Well Zan, at least it rhymes here and there, the Poet you!

[Kikapu]

We don't know for anything for certainty, Erolz, because we never had a True Democracy, or even just Democracy in Cyprus in 1960. Had we had True Democracy in 1960, who is to say Enosis would have been sought by the GCs, so your argument has no merits really.

lol

So you don't have any facts to back up your claim, Erolz. I didn't think so. The facts are Enosis never happened and neither did Democracy in the 1960. All you have is conjecture, and I'm afraid that cannot be used as evidence to support your argument. The known facts are that Cyprus did not have Democracy of any kind in 1960, which lead to the fact that Cypriots of all ethnicity were not binded together as "one people", and the fact that the whole island still does not have Democracy under one roof for all Cypriots of different ethnicities, is also the reason as to why we don't have "one people" in Cyprus today. That's why it was important to start these negotiations under the terms of Single Citizenship, Single Sovereignty and Single International legal personality in order to bind the people into "one people", which many TCs on this forum are not happy about the prospect of the island's citizens becoming "one people". Why is that?

Just because members of the club have agreed amongst themselves initially that any member can have a veto rights on certain times, it does not mean Democracy does not exists in those member states or the club itself. Doesn't NATO members have a veto power over new members being allowed to the NATO club? I don't know what your argument is really. If you are upset about EU member clubs having a veto power on new members wanting to join the EU club because it effects Turkey, then why didn't you object to the Annan Plan that was giving veto power to the TCs and the GCs as a community for the New United Cyprus as a country? Even worse, the TC community is going to be much smaller than the GC community, so why didn't you object to a numerical minority having veto power over the numerical majority? I'm sorry Erolz, but you are trying to make Orange juice from a lemon and lemonade from an Orange. Once again, your argument has no merits at all.

My 'thesis' is totally consistent, that representation separate to sheer numerical numbers is not only compatible with democracy but is required by it in certain cases. This is true within a state and within union of states. Its true of the EU and UN, its true in individual states where equal representation regardless of numerical size exists all through government, national and local. It is universally true. Those who have a consistency problem are those who try to argue its true for oranges and not for lemons - or to be more explicit those that argue any system in Cyprus that grants TC as a community representation disproportionate to their numerical numbers is not 'true democracy', whilst not arguing for the same principal anywhere else. Those are the ones with a consistency deficit and it seems to me that you are one of that number ?

Erolz, who is arguing against equal representation when applied democratically to anyone regardless of their community or country size. Your argument was why should the RoC have a veto rights in the EU as a numerical minority country and not the numerical minority TCs in the RoC. This is where oranges and lemons come in that you are not willing to separate.

[zan]

Kiks doesn't even understand what he himself writes, never mind what is said to him


Full of contradictions again and again. The EU is a club that decided for itself but we must have it forced on us. What happened to democratic choice?

Oranges and lemons
Says a head full of melons

I really am thick
Says the man from Zürıch

When will he learn
Says the bells of Lucerne

I don't think he will
Says the bells of Giswil

What a poor lad
Says the bells of Stansstad

Then let's make him well
Says the bells of Gimel

Here comes a candle to light you to bed
And here comes a doctor to sort out your head


Sorry Kiks. Couldn't resist.

Well Zan, at least it rhymes here and there, the Poet you!

that hurts

[zan]

We don't know for anything for certainty, Erolz, because we never had a True Democracy, or even just Democracy in Cyprus in 1960. Had we had True Democracy in 1960, who is to say Enosis would have been sought by the GCs, so your argument has no merits really.

lol

So you don't have any facts to back up your claim, Erolz. I didn't think so. The facts are Enosis never happened and neither did Democracy in the 1960. All you have is conjecture, and I'm afraid that cannot be used as evidence to support your argument. The known facts are that Cyprus did not have Democracy of any kind in 1960, which lead to the fact that Cypriots of all ethnicity were not binded together as "one people", and the fact that the whole island still does not have Democracy under one roof for all Cypriots of different ethnicities, is also the reason as to why we don't have "one people" in Cyprus today. That's why it was important to start these negotiations under the terms of Single Citizenship, Single Sovereignty and Single International legal personality in order to bind the people into "one people", which many TCs on this forum are not happy about the prospect of the island's citizens becoming "one people". Why is that?

Just because members of the club have agreed amongst themselves initially that any member can have a veto rights on certain times, it does not mean Democracy does not exists in those member states or the club itself. Doesn't NATO members have a veto power over new members being allowed to the NATO club? I don't know what your argument is really. If you are upset about EU member clubs having a veto power on new members wanting to join the EU club because it effects Turkey, then why didn't you object to the Annan Plan that was giving veto power to the TCs and the GCs as a community for the New United Cyprus as a country? Even worse, the TC community is going to be much smaller than the GC community, so why didn't you object to a numerical minority having veto power over the numerical majority? I'm sorry Erolz, but you are trying to make Orange juice from a lemon and lemonade from an Orange. Once again, your argument has no merits at all.

My 'thesis' is totally consistent, that representation separate to sheer numerical numbers is not only compatible with democracy but is required by it in certain cases. This is true within a state and within union of states. Its true of the EU and UN, its true in individual states where equal representation regardless of numerical size exists all through government, national and local. It is universally true. Those who have a consistency problem are those who try to argue its true for oranges and not for lemons - or to be more explicit those that argue any system in Cyprus that grants TC as a community representation disproportionate to their numerical numbers is not 'true democracy', whilst not arguing for the same principal anywhere else. Those are the ones with a consistency deficit and it seems to me that you are one of that number ?

Erolz, who is arguing against equal representation when applied democratically to anyone regardless of their community or country size. Your argument was why should the RoC have a veto rights in the EU as a numerical minority country and not the numerical minority TCs in the RoC. This is where oranges and lemons come in that you are not willing to separate.

And the conjecture that YOUR " democracy is going to work one so called (by you) conjecture for another as I keep saying.....full of contradictions. ENOSIS didn't happen because we didn't let it. Unity didn't happen because the GCs didn't let it happen.........but then you don't seem to be able to follow any sort of logic or timeline so you talk crap thinking if you produce enough of it then a small seed might grow. Your crap is contaminated Kiks and it doesn't take too much looking to see that

[erolz66]

So you don't have any facts to back up your claim, Erolz.

Look if you want to believe that all that stopped Cypriots from becoming 'one people' was a lack of 'true democracy' and ignore the truth of the inherently divisive desires of both enosis and taksim and the pursuit of them, as if they played no part in stopping and undermining the creation of a unified Cypriot people, then so be it. There is no point in trying to argue against such nonsense. If you further want to pretend that if Cyprus' future after the end of British rule had simply been a decision based on your version of 'true democracy' it would not have lead to enosis, then you go ahead and believe that. The facts are that without an acceptance that the TC community had a legitimate right to resist the imposition of enosis on them against their will after the end of British rule, not only would there be no Cypriot people there would be no Cypriot state either.

Erolz, who is arguing against equal representation when applied democratically to anyone regardless of their community or country size.

You are against such when you argue that smaller countries should have equal representation in things like the EU and the UN.

Your argument was why should the RoC have a veto rights in the EU as a numerical minority country and not the numerical minority TCs in the RoC. This is where oranges and lemons come in that you are not willing to separate.

Look it either is a fundamental principal and requirement of democracy that representation is directly proportional to population size or it is not. What is madness is to claim it is a fundamental principal and requirement when it suits you and not when it does not suit you.