Cyprus-Forum.com

[erolz66]

The changes were proposed in 1963 not in 1965.

Changes were 'proposed' in 63 and (illegally) made in 65.

In that time you showed no interest in returning to the government and you had concentrated on partition.

Even if what you say is true, and it is far from such, it still does not justify the illegal unilateral removal of the TC communities rights under the 60's agreements. Nor does it fit with your earlier claim of "which means that the 1960 agreements are the only agreements".

If you wanted to return and if we had done something illegal then why didn't you take your case to international courts?

The unilateral removal of the TC communities rights by an all GC administration in 65 was clearly illegal. The reason we did no go to an international court was there was no such court that had jurisdiction over such things that we could go to. There was a court that had jurisdiction that we could have gone to, the Cypriot Constitutional court, defined as part of the 60's agreements, except Makarios had already and unilaterally and illegally refused to accept that courts rulings.

In any case what you got in 1960 was unfair and you got it by blackmailing us and dirty tactics. In Cyprus you are an ethnic minority and your real rights are those of an ethnic minority. Everything else is just imposed by those foreigners who want to keep their troops on our island and they are using your minority as an excuse to serve their interests.

So basically when you said "I don't like those agreements because they are unfair and divisive but I accept them because we signed them and if you were to demand a return to those agreements then you would have legal right to them.." what you actually meant is you do not accept them because they were unfair and imposed by foreigners and we had no legal right to them when you unilaterally took them away from us despite what was in the 60's agreements ? And to return your question above to you, if those agreements you agreed to and sign were in fact so unfair why did YOU not take your case to international courts?

As I said already the futility of 'arguing' with you is well established and this thread just highlights that yet again.

This 'line', post 74 of 'let us just go back to the 60's agreements' is a common one repeated here over the years by GC like yourself Sotos and others. It is bullshit - as the above posts clearly show and it is pointless. If you had of been willing to 'go back to the 60's agreements' before 74 then the events that happened in 74 would never had happened as they did. It is exactly because you believed pre 74 you could steal TC rights regardless of legality and get away with it that subsequent events transpired the way they did, Saying you want to go back to them AFTER 74 having refused to accept such before 74 is exactly the reason why such a 'deal' is a non starter now.

[boomerang]

The changes were proposed in 1963 not in 1965. In that time you showed no interest in returning to the government and you had concentrated on partition. If you wanted to return and if we had done something illegal then why didn't you take your case to international courts? In any case what you got in 1960 was unfair and you got it by blackmailing us and dirty tactics. In Cyprus you are an ethnic minority and your real rights are those of an ethnic minority. Everything else is just imposed by those foreigners who want to keep their troops on our island and they are using your minority as an excuse to serve their interests.

even so, does that mean you don't have to take on board their wants?...had you taken on board their wants, who knows today, maybe we would not have been in this situation...oh you thought Greece would have come to your defence...huh?...

facts are in 74, prior to the invasion, the gcs were running the government, a de-facto enosis as we speak, so why the coup?...could it been that your beloved Greece and turkey had other plans?...

your failure to see realities brought us to the situation today...funny thing you have not learned from the past...you keep on throwing ethnic minority around not really knowing what it really means...

[Sotos]

The futility of arguing with YOU is well established ... but here is the thing: We never wanted to have any kind of arguments with you. We didn't even want to ever need to talk to you or see you. You are the ones who invaded our island and imposed yourselves on us and THAT is the problem of Cyprus. Now what I said and what I repeat is that returning to 1960 agreements is the only thing you maybe have the right to legally demand. The fact that we did not like those unfair and racist agreements is a fact. It is also a fact that we did and will continue doing everything we can to make Cyprus free and democratic. Just as it is a fact that what you really wanted all along was partition... you can deny the truth all you want but it doesn't change a thing. Now where exactly do you disagree with me? Do you believe that you have legally the right to demand anything different than the 1960 agreements and get it without our signature? The 1960 agreements were imposed by blackmailing Makarios. Morally, laws created democratically by the native people trump any laws imposed by foreigners using blackmail. If, as you claim, there is no international body that can defend the previously immorally imposed laws then even a return to that is something you can't demand!

[Sotos]

The changes were proposed in 1963 not in 1965. In that time you showed no interest in returning to the government and you had concentrated on partition. If you wanted to return and if we had done something illegal then why didn't you take your case to international courts? In any case what you got in 1960 was unfair and you got it by blackmailing us and dirty tactics. In Cyprus you are an ethnic minority and your real rights are those of an ethnic minority. Everything else is just imposed by those foreigners who want to keep their troops on our island and they are using your minority as an excuse to serve their interests.

even so, does that mean you don't have to take on board their wants?...had you taken on board their wants, who knows today, maybe we would not have been in this situation...oh you thought Greece would have come to your defence...huh?...

facts are in 74, prior to the invasion, the gcs were running the government, a de-facto enosis as we speak, so why the coup?...could it been that your beloved Greece and turkey had other plans?...

your failure to see realities brought us to the situation today...funny thing you have not learned from the past...you keep on throwing ethnic minority around not really knowing what it really means...

The TCs didn't accept that they are an ethnic minority. The Kurds and all other minorities in all countries would be celebrating if the majorities in their countries accepted for them to have the kind of rights that we accepted for the TCs to have ... Turkish as an official language for example ... which we accepted and we didn't want to change. The problem is the Turkish expansionism ... not that we didn't accept whatever unfair demands the Turks have in order to appease them.

[boomerang]

you are igorant sotos...in australia english might be the national language apart from supplying interpreters government will print most documements in many languages....why do you always compare the roc with developing countries....why not look up to developed countries....you are doing a diservice to the roc.....

[Sotos]

you are igorant sotos...in australia english might be the national language apart from supplying interpreters government will print most documements in many languages....why do you always compare the roc with developing countries....why not look up to developed countries....you are doing a diservice to the roc.....

How many of the developed ones have ethnic minority languages as official languages? Supplying interpreters and printing documents in many languages is nothing like having a minority language being official one. I have no problem in doing in Cyprus what they do in Australia... but ask the TCs and you will see that having Turkish as an official language is far more important. It seems to me you are just trying to oppose what I say for the sake of opposing it because of some words we exchanged in another thread

[erolz66]

How many of the developed ones have ethnic minority languages as official languages?

Belgium - German is an official language of Belgium and its spoke by 1% of the Belgium population as their first language.
Luxemburg - French is an official language (6% first language) , German is an official language (4% first language).

You want more ?

Oh and just to give you some context for the size of the TC community at 18% of Cypriot population (a part of the Cypriot population that by your own admission you would prefer to never have to see or talk too), the % of the UK population that is of non British ethnicity is 12.9%. So as a numerical minority the TC community is a larger % of the Cypriot population than ALL non British ethnic minorities combined are in the UK.

[repulsewarrior]

How many of the developed ones have ethnic minority languages as official languages?

Belgium - German is an official language of Belgium and its spoke by 1% of the Belgium population as their first language.
Luxemburg - French is an official language (6% first language) , German is an official language (4% first language).

You want more ?

Oh and just to give you some context for the size of the TC community at 18% of Cypriot population (a part of the Cypriot population that by your own admission you would prefer to never have to see or talk too), the % of the UK population that is of non British ethnicity is 12.9%. So as a numerical minority the TC community is a larger % of the Cypriot population than ALL non British ethnic minorities combined are in the UK.

...I will add Canada to that list, which has a Federal Government, as well as being Bicommunal and Bizonal, it is Bilingual.

[erolz66]

How many of the developed ones have ethnic minority languages as official languages?

Belgium - German is an official language of Belgium and its spoke by 1% of the Belgium population as their first language.
Luxemburg - French is an official language (6% first language) , German is an official language (4% first language).

You want more ?

...I will add Canada to that list, ...

The list of countries that have more than one official language is massive RW. At a quick guess I would estimate 1/3 to 1/2 and possibly more of all countries have more than one official language. South Africa has 11 official languages, 10 of which are spoken by less than 18% of the population. Sotos resents Turkish being an official language of the RoC, not because such is atypical in any way but because he resents there being any Cypriots in Cyprus of Turkish ethnicity at all. That is the simple truth as far as I am concerned.

[zan]

How many of the developed ones have ethnic minority languages as official languages?

Belgium - German is an official language of Belgium and its spoke by 1% of the Belgium population as their first language.
Luxemburg - French is an official language (6% first language) , German is an official language (4% first language).

You want more ?

...I will add Canada to that list, ...

The list of countries that have more than one official language is massive RW. At a quick guess I would estimate 1/3 to 1/2 and possibly more of all countries have more than one official language. South Africa has 11 official languages, 10 of which are spoken by less than 18% of the population. Sotos resents Turkish being an official language of the RoC, not because such is atypical in any way but because he resents there being any Cypriots in Cyprus of Turkish ethnicity at all. That is the simple truth as far as I am concerned.

Plus he's got it written in front of him and he hasn't bothered to check the validity I see sound bites in everything he has written. Some on here are sooooooo easy to read